(9780197552506 - Performing The Ramayana Tradition) The Ramayana Narrative Tradition As A Resource For Performance
(9780197552506 - Performing The Ramayana Tradition) The Ramayana Narrative Tradition As A Resource For Performance
(9780197552506 - Performing The Ramayana Tradition) The Ramayana Narrative Tradition As A Resource For Performance
Where does the Ramayana narrative begin and end? The question sounds
straightforward, yet no single answer applies to every textual rendition.
Most pre-colonial Hindu narratives which retell Rama’s story begin with his
birth on earth, but Chandravati’s 16th-century Bengali telling of the story
opens with Sita’s birth.1 Some retellings of the story end triumphantly with
Rama’s coronation and the inauguration of his dharmic rule. Others, such
as a set of women’s songs, take the story onward to narrate Sita’s trials as a
“single” parent, raising her sons at Valmiki’s ashram. The Indian Ramayana
tradition encompasses many retellings in hundreds of literary works of dif-
ferent lengths and narrative arcs. Consider, for example, how differently the
story unfolds in these two examples. A brief one in Telugu consists of just
three words: kaṭṭe, koṭṭe, tecche, “built [the bridge to Lanka], beat [Ravana],
brought [back Sita].”2 The12th-century Irāmāvatāram [The Descent of
Rama] in Tamil appears near the opposite side of the spectrum in length;
even without counting its extensive interpolations, it runs to more than
10,000 verses.3
Selectivity shapes where and how a retelling starts and ends, as well as
which episodes receive emphasis. Selectivity plays an even greater role in
how events from the Ramayana tradition are represented in performance.
The long and complex Ramayana narrative contains so many episodes and
characters that it is rarely performed today in its entirety.4 Most enactments
1 For an English translation of this unique text, see Bose and Bose (2013).
2 Velcheru Narayana Rao, a Telugu scholar, shared this three-word summary with me.
3 The oldest extant Irāmāvatāram manuscript dates from 1578, but some later ones include up to
12,000 couplets, many added significantly later by Velli Tampiran (Blackburn 1996: 30).
4 A noteworthy exception is the Ramlila of Ramnagar, which includes recitation of the entire
Rāmcaritmānas by Tulsidas over 30–31 days. See Rani’s Chapter 15 in this volume.
Paula Richman, The Ramayana Narrative Tradition as a Resource for Performance In: Performing the Ramayana
Tradition. Edited by: Paula Richman and Rustom Bharucha, Oxford University Press. © Oxford University Press 2021.
DOI: 10.1093/oso/9780197552506.003.0001
4 Orientations and Beginnings
Narrative Units
The Ramayana narrative arc contains seven units called kandas (kāṇḍas;
“books,” “cantos,” or “sections”). Familiarity with the contents of the kandas
enables readers to locate enactments within the narrative’s arc. The earliest,
extant, full, literary text in the Ramayana tradition, Valmiki’s Rāmāyaṇa,
begins with the kanda that tells of Rama’s birth on earth and concludes
with the kanda that recounts his return to heaven.5 Valmiki’s depiction of
5 Robert Goldman, general editor of the authoritative, seven-volume, annotated, English trans-
lation of the Rāmāyaṇa, concludes that the text’s oldest parts date to the mid-6th century bce
(1984: 22–23) and the final kāṇḍa to no later than the 2nd or 3rd centuries ce (2017: 69).
The Ramayana Narrative Tradition 5
6 For an astute introduction and helpful notes, see Sattar’s translation of Uttara-kāṇḍa (2016).
7 Pollock (1991: 5–6).
6 Orientations and Beginnings
The volume brings together case studies that display different kinds of diver-
sity in enactments drawn from Ramayana narratives. Performances studied
include enactments from different historical periods and Indian regions.
All the productions in the volume have been staged in recent years; most
continue to be part of the repertoire of specific performance traditions. The
volume’s authors examine these enactments to tease out how they represent
Ramayana events and characters while adhering to (or departing from) the
conventions of individual performance traditions. In the process, the volume
reveals multiple narrative strands within the Ramayana tradition. In doing
so, it also highlights some of the ways that playwrights have conceptualized—
and performers have represented—episodes that exemplify these strands.
The majority of published scholarship on the Ramayana tradition focuses
on literary works, in manuscript or print, that recount or take the story for
granted. Yet Valmiki’s Rāmāyaṇa includes an account of its first recitation
by Rama’s sons, thereby locating oral performance at the start of the textual
lineage: Valmiki trained Rama’s twin sons, Lava and Kusha, to perform his
Rāmāyaṇa, which is “sweet both when recited and when sung” and “emi-
nently suitable” for accompaniment with drums and stringed instruments;
the boys are described as excelling in “articulation and modulation” while
singing the poem.9 Furthermore, until the mid-20th century, literacy in
8 Robert Goldman and Sally Sutherland Goldman call this account of Ravana “a mini-epic in it-
10 Space limitations make it impossible to cite all secondary literature on the Ramnagar Ramlila,
but the following exemplify diverse approaches: Schechner and Hess (1977); Kapur (1990); Kumar
(1995); Hess (2006); Lothspeich (2020). A team of scholars published a translation and analysis of
Āścaryacūḍāmaṇi in Jones, ed. (1984). Another volume by Margi, edited by P. Venugopalan (2009),
brings together for the first time the āṭṭaprakāraṃs (acting manuals) for seven acts (including three
manuscripts from Ammannur Madhava Chakyar) and krāmadīpikas (production manuals) for six
acts of Āścaryacūḍāmaṇi. Also see the regularly updated bibliography on Kutiyattam, under Heike
Oberlin (Moser)’s supervision: https://publikationen.uni-tuebingen.de/xmlui/handle/10900/46921.
8 Orientations and Beginnings
11 The case differs somewhat for Mahabharata narratives of the Pandavas and Krishna. For ex-
ample, Aparna Dharwadker analyzes plays drawn from the Mahabharata narrative during the
modern period (2005). Also see M. L. Varadpande’s Mahabharata in Performance, which contains an
overview of its episodes from various performance traditions (1996). For stories of Krishna’s life, see
Norvin Hein’s study of Ramlila and Raslila plays in Mathura (1972: 129–271) and John S. Hawley on
enactments of Krishna’s deeds, especially in Vrindavan (1981).
The Ramayana Narrative Tradition 9
within the Ramayana tradition. Next, Rustom Bharucha’s Chapter 2, “Thinking the
Ramayana Tradition through Performance,” orients general readers and Ramayana
scholars by analyzing relevant Indian terms dealing with theater and performance
across regions and performance traditions to facilitate a critical grasp of the psycho-
physical, dramaturgical, and contemporary registers of Ramayana performances.
A third approach to the Ramayana tradition emerges from looking at the narrative’s
role for beginning students of Kutiyattam, a centuries-old Sanskrit theatrical form
whose plays are still enacted in India’s southwestern state of Kerala today. Chapter
3, “Where Narrative and Performance Meet: Nepathya’s Rāmāyaṇa Saṃkṣēpam,”
is introduced and translated from Malayalam into English by Rizio Yohannan.
This Rāmāyaṇa Saṃkṣēpam [Ramayana Condensed] forms part of a lineage of
summaries, which first appear in Valmiki’s Rāmāyaṇa itself. Some scholars view
them as vestiges of memory aids that ensured accurate transmission by bards who
recited oral narratives in court. The first chapter of Valmiki’s Rāmāyaṇa contains a
summary called Saṃkṣipta Rāmāyaṇa [Condensed Ramayana], which provides a
retrospective account of how Valmiki composed his Rāmāyaṇa.12 First, he heard
Narada, a celestial seer, summarize Rama’s deeds. It was only after this summary
that Valmiki created a new poetic meter, meditated, and composed his text. Thus,
Valmiki transformed Narada’s summary into a memorable poetic work.
Rāmāyaṇa Saṃkṣēpam, too, plays a transformative role as the initial text
through which students of Kutiyattam learn to perform memorable works
of theater. Yohannan analyzes how its linguistic and temporal features facil-
itate learning Kutiyattam’s basic gestures and expressions; students master
the skills and aesthetics of their art by watching, hearing, and imitating their
guru who enacts the summary. Its pedagogical role attests to the pivotal role
of Rama’s story in India’s oldest continuous performance tradition.13
This volume’s Part II includes a poem and four plays that criticize the out-
come of the story of the Shudra named Shambuka, which first appears in the
Uttara-kāṇḍa attributed to Valmiki. The story legitimates the social hierarchy
12 Saṃkṣēpam and saṃkṣipta both derive from the Sanskrit sam (together) and the verb root kṣip
Pratimānāṭakam [The Mirror Play], and Abhiṣekanāṭakam [The Coronation Play]. Many scholars
attribute the latter two plays to Bhasa.
10 Orientations and Beginnings
prescribed in brahminical texts, which divides humans into four ranked cat-
egories called varnas (varṇas). Brahmins (priests and teachers), Kshatriyas
(warriors), and Vaishyas (merchants) are classified as “twice-borns,” having
two births: a physical one and later a ritual one that qualifies them to study
sacred texts. Thus initiated, according to brahminical texts, they are eligible
to perform tapas (asceticism). In contrast, those texts define Shudras as
servants, whom it ranks as the lowest and most polluting varna, denies study
of sacred texts, and forbids to perform tapas. The Sanskrit story culminates
with Rama maintaining the varna hierarchy by beheading Shambuka for
practicing tapas.
This first extant narration of Shambuka’s story contains four components,
each stressing that one must never perform the duties of a varna other than
one’s own. The first component depicts a Brahmin entering Rama’s court,
carrying his son’s corpse. He accuses the king of failing to uphold the social
order because a son would never die prior to his father in a well-governed
kingdom. Second, Sage Narada warns King Rama that if a Shudra performs
tapas, it threatens the order of the cosmos, so the miscreant must be executed
immediately. I call the third component the “textual seed;” it depicts Rama
interrogating Shambuka, who is practicing extreme austerities. Warning
the ascetic to speak the truth, Rama asks Shambuka’s varna and the goal of
his tapas. Shambuka replies that he was born a Shudra and has engaged in
tapas to attain “the status of a god in this very body.” Even before Shambuka
finishes speaking, Rama decapitates him. The fourth component describes
sages and gods lauding Rama, certifying that Shambuka’s beheading is un-
ambiguously worthy of praise. In 20th-and 21st-century plays in this cluster
about Shambuka (Hindi, Shambuk), the only component that remains is the
textual seed, providing the basis for condemnation of upper-caste violence
against Shudras.
Part II begins with Chapter 4, “Shambuk’s Severed Head,” written by
acclaimed poet and writer, Omprakash Valmiki (1950–2013), translated by
Aaron Sherraden from Hindi into English. “Valmiki” at the end of the poet’s
name signals a connection between the allegedly low social rank into which
Omprakash was born and the ancient author of Rāmāyaṇa. Legend says that
the original Valmiki was born into a family of robbers, a group that brah-
minical texts classify as “impure.” Since they viewed Valmiki as polluting,
he was not judged worthy to chant Rama’s pure name. Instead, he was given
the mantra “marā” which, repeated constantly (ma-rāma-rāma), meant
that he uttered Rama’s name inadvertently, thereby accumulating merit. The
The Ramayana Narrative Tradition 11
Dalit caste into which Omprakash Valmiki was born claims Valmiki as its
ancestor.14 “Shambuk’s Severed Head” assumes familiarity with the seed of
Shambuk’s story and charges that self-proclaimed Rams today continue to
murder Shambuks, while society turns a blind eye to such atrocities.
The two remaining essays clustered in Part II examine the story’s textual
seed as it developed between the 1930s and the present. Sherraden’s Chapter 5,
“Recasting Shambuk in Three Hindi Anti-Caste Dramas,” shows how a net-
work of Hindi publishers in North India printed plays about Shambuk’s life
and sold them at Dalit gatherings and local melās (fairs) starting in the 1930s.
The plays all feature (or take for granted) the textual seed of the interroga-
tion and beheading of Shambuka. He is portrayed as a disciplined and articu-
late ascetic who contravenes prohibitions against Shudras performing tapas.
The playwrights transform Valmiki’s solitary forest ascetic into a teacher at
whose ashram his followers imbibe self-respect. After he is martyred to pre-
vent others from emulating his actions, his students unite to prevent future
upper-caste violence against them.
Part II’s last essay, Chapter 6, on “The Killing of Shambuk,” by director
Sudhanva Deshpande, recounts how Jana Natya Manch (People’s Theatre
Front, known as Janam), a Marxist-inspired street theater group, used
Shambuk’s beheading as the core of a 2004 play written to spread leftist ideals.
Janam staged “The Killing of Shambuk” in more than 50 proscenium and
open-air productions in Delhi, Maharashtra, Bihar, and Uttar Pradesh. The
play also integrated elements that expanded its scope, such as a subplot (a
love story), dramatic variety (a play within a play), and humor (a tale where
a clever laborer outwits a cruel landowner), but at its core lay the Shambuka
story’s textual seed.
At least five textual strands about Shambuka circulate in India. We know
that the first strand occurs in the Uttara-kāṇḍa attributed to Valmiki. The
second strand, which appears mainly in Jaina texts, casts Shambuka as
Shurpanakha’s son, whom Lakshmana kills. A third strand in Hindu devo-
tional retellings portrays those slain by Rama as attaining moksha (eternal
dwelling in Vishnu’s heaven); these texts praise Shambuka’s killing as moti-
vated by Rama’s compassion because it enables Shambuka to attain the
14 For the Valmiki caste, see Lynch (1969), Juergensmeyer (1982: 169– 180) and Leslie (2005).
Besides an autobiography, Omprakash wrote a history of the Valmikis. Valmiki sanitation workers
in North India made newspaper headlines in 1988 by refusing to collect garbage until the serial
Rāmāyaṇ, which appeared on the state-sponsored television channel, added the episode in which
(their alleged ancestor) Valmiki sheltered Sita in his ashram, which the serial had not included.
12 Orientations and Beginnings
15 For Jaina tellings, see chapter 3 in Sheradden (2019). An early form of the devotional strand
appears in Bhavabhuti’s Uttararāmacarita (Pollock, trans., 2007: 145–146). For the Kannada play by
K. V. Puttappa and a Tamil play, see Richman (2008: 129–148), and for a Telugu play, see Narayana
Rao (2001: 159–177). These southern retellings are little-known in North India.
16 Pollock (1993: 21).
17 Rāvaṇodbhavam is generally regarded as the first Kathakali work with an anti- hero (prati-
nāyaka) as its central character.
The Ramayana Narrative Tradition 13
by the same father, but Kubera took his father’s wealth, leaving Ravana
none. This account depicts Kaikasi as a second wife jealous of the privileges
obtained by Kubera, the first wife’s son. Kaikasi incites in Ravana an ambi-
tion to perform asceticism that will allow him to surpass his half-brother. In
contrast, centuries later in the 1780s, Tapassāṭṭam depicts Ravana hearing
Kaikasi weeping out of fear that her inferior status as second wife will de-
prive Ravana of privileges enjoyed by Kubera. To prove to his mother that
Ravana can overcome the limitations of his birth, he goes off to perform as-
ceticism that eventually brings higher status to Kaikasi. Because Nambudiri’s
slight alterations show that Ravana conducted tapas neither out of greed nor
egotism, the audience realizes that the goal of his harsh self-mortification
was to end his mother’s sorrow. Therefore, Ravana appears in a more altuistic
and sympathetic light in Tapassāṭṭam than the Ravana in the Sanskrit
Uttara-kāṇḍa.
Laṅkēswaraṉ, the Tamil mythological drama written and first staged
in 1954 by Manohar, who also starred as Ravana, made excellent use of
Manohar’s talent for finding a hitherto unrecognized nobility in “evil”
characters. He borrowed aspects of Ravana’s character from Kamban’s Tamil
Irāmāvatāram [The Descent of Rama] at a time when Tamil scholars and
antiquarians had successfully revived interest in Kamban’s text, hailing it
as proof of the nobility, continuity, and epic scope of Tamil culture, which
they linked with Ravana’s Lanka.18 Although Kamban reserved his highest
praise for Rama, he also endowed Ravana with the pivotal qualities of the
ideal ruler found in Tamil’s earliest war poems: he led his warriors to victory
and used war booty to enrich his realm. Manohar also borrowed an incident
in which Ravana’s infant daughter was put in a box and placed in the sea from
the Sanskrit Ānanda Rāmāyaṇa (ca. 15th century). Far from undermining
the play’s success, the two borrowings from older texts attracted enthusiastic
Tamil audiences, who attended 1,800 performances of the play in India and
Ceylon.
Turning to Bharucha’s essay, which highlights two avant-garde interpret-
ations of Ravana, Vinay Kumar’s The Tenth Head focuses on a conflict be-
tween Ravana’s Tenth Head and the other nine heads. Although the script
refers to some individual events from the Ramayana story (e.g., the protec-
tive circle drawn by Lakshmana to protect Sita), the production connects to
Ravana primarily through independently envisioned imagery, graphics, and
19 During a post-performance conversation, Rao identified a key performance that shaped her
view of Ravana: the intensity and single focus of Tapassāṭṭam in Kathakali. As an actress who
has created her own one-person show on Ravana, she vividly recalls how a Kathakali actor enacts
Tapassāṭṭam, sitting alone “in deep reflection, holding the entire space of the stage.”
The Ramayana Narrative Tradition 15
20 Henceforth, I refer to Usha Nangiar as “Usha,” as she is known in the Nangyarkuttu world.
21 Bruin was program director and main fundraiser at the Kattaikkuttu Gurukulam. After training
a new generation of female and male performers, the school closed in the spring of 2020.
16 Orientations and Beginnings
By focusing on how both Rama and Ravana use women as pawns in male
rivalry, the play deconstructs binary oppositions between the demonic and
the divine, as well as adharmic and dharmic modes of conduct. The play also
dismisses binary opposition between Sita and Shurpanakha by representing
each as beautiful and independent.22 RāmaRāvaṇā draws on Irāmāvatāram’s
verses for song lyrics, quotes the passage in Kamban’s text where Rama
refuses to accept Sita back as part of this play’s dialogue, and depicts Rama
as being unaware of his divinity. During the play, a crown symbolizing power
and rule hangs above the stage; as the play ends, Sita pauses briefly under it
and then exits the stage, while the lyric of a song poignantly asks where a just
king is hidden. It asks that the king come forward to govern in an enlight-
ened way.
Narayanan’s Chapter 10, “Writing Her ‘Self,’ ” traces how Usha revived
and expanded female solos in the Nangyarkuttu repertoire, thus imbuing
them with a contemporary sensibility. The Nangyarkuttu performance tra-
dition consisted largely of actresses performing solos of female characters
who appear in the Kutiyattam repertoire; Nangyarkuttu is called a “sister”
form to Kutiyattam since both share the same theatrical conventions, yet
over time, female solos had nearly vanished. Some writers attribute their loss
to an oral tradition that claims it is inauspicious to portray the pañcakanyās
(five virgins):23 Sita, Tara, Ahalya, and Mandodari (four of the five) come
from the Ramayana story. In 1980, when Ammannur Madhava Chakyar, the
doyen of Kutiyattam performers and teachers, decided to resume training
students in Nangyarkuttu, Usha studied with him and also immersed herself
in Kutiyattam manuscripts of production and acting manuals. She discov-
ered that Nangyarkuttu had once been replete with female solos, even ones
later proscribed as inauspicious.
Realizing that the manuals served to authorize reviving women’s solos,
Usha reinstated and enacted several female characters in accord with
directions from the manuals. For example, in the production manual on
Āścaryacūḍāmaṇi, she learned about a solo on Mandodari (Ravana’s wife),
which included its first and last verses. After commissioning a Sanskrit
22 Valmiki depicted Shurpanakha as ugly, but Kamban set a precedent in southern depictions of
Shurpanakha in Irāmāvatāram, where she adopts a beautiful form when she approaches Rama.
23 Rama banished Sita because she was abducted by Ravana. Tara was Vali’s wife, who was appro-
priated by Sugriva. The husband of Ahalya cursed her for adultery with Indra. Mandodari, born to
Maya and a celestial apsara, married Ravana, who was a rakshasa. For analysis of the five virgins, see
Bhattacharya (2019).
The Ramayana Narrative Tradition 17
scholar and Kutiyattam connoisseur to compose suitable poetry for the rest,
Usha enacted the solo, to great acclaim. In 2019, she received a request to
create a solo for the 100th publication anniversary of Kumaran Asan’s 1919
Malayalam poem, Cintāviṣṭayāya Sīta [Sita in Reflection], which poet and
Malayalam scholar K. Satchidanandan characterizes as interrogating “the
whole value system that led to her [Sita’s] tragedy.”24 Perceiving how pre-
sciently Kumaran Asan depicted patriarchy as trapping Sita and Rama in a
gilded cage, Usha created and enacted Sita not as a passive wife, but rather a
woman becoming conscious of the culturally constructed gender roles that
rob individuals of agency.
The case studies in Part IV analyze two ways that girls and women have
gained access to the stage and have claimed agency as performers. The
Kattaikkuttu Gurukulam trained girls for the stage by educating them to
enact female and male roles and by staging productions in which they were
treated as equals to boys. By training a new generation of actresses, the school
prepared them to combat attempts to exclude them from future theatrical
productions. In a different context, consulting manuscripts of Kutiyattam
manuals led Usha to realize that Nangyarkuttu actresses possessed more
agency in the past than in the present, so she used their textual authority
to revive old solos. Then, in the new solos she created, she challenged male
representations of female characters. Thus, she modeled how Nangyarkuttu
performers could not only recover and expand their repertoire but also in-
crease their exercise of agency.
24 Satchidanandan (2005: 150). See Asan’s poem in English translation (Yohannan 2008: 64–87).
18 Orientations and Beginnings
25 Medhi (1997: lix–lx) analyzes the selection of episodes in Rām Vijay, commenting on ones
which appear (or do not appear) in Sankaradeva’s retelling of incidents from the Bāla-kāṇḍa.
The Ramayana Narrative Tradition 19
26 My discussion here was enriched by conversations with, and performances by, Yakshagana and
Talamaddale artists and also spectators in Karnataka in January 2011 and December 2016.
20 Orientations and Beginnings
Thus far, this volume’s essays analyze enactments and contextualize them
in relation to textual traditions, language, and regions. The final part
examines enactment but goes beyond it to study what happens after it ends.
In Chapter 14, “Revisiting ‘Being Ram,’ ” Urmimala Sarkar Munsi reflects
on not only 25 years of acting in Uday Shankar Indian Cultural Centre’s
dance-drama, Seeta Swayambara, but also events following performances.
In Chapter 15, “The Night before Bhor Ārti,” Bhargav Rani investigates what
audiences at the Ramnagar Ramlila do after a scene of the lila ends but before
the next begins, especially on the night before the lila’s last day.
The Ramayana Narrative Tradition 21
Seeta Swayambara, in which Sarkar Munsi played the role of Rama, was
one of the most popular shows in the group’s repertoire. It drew on selected
Bāla-kāṇḍa episodes: Vishwamitra bringing Rama and Lakshmana to his
ashram to defeat the rakshasas, the breaking of the bow that was Sita’s mar-
riage test, and the wedding of Sita and Rama. Uday Shankar’s dance curric-
ulum, designed in the 1940s and 1950s, required all students to study the
“male” movements of Kathakali and the “female” movements of Manipuri
dance, so Sarkar Munsi learned to enact “male” characters with specific
walks, facial expressions, and gestures. To play Rama, Sarkar Munsi received
a list of “dos and don’ts” that prescribed precisely how she must step, smile,
and move. She learned to embody Rama with an upright spine and respond
graciously when viewers came to her for divine blessings.
Yet none of this prepared her for “being Ram” in two other ways. The day
after she had enacted Rama on the previous night, the performers attended
a lunch at the house of a prominent judge, and his wife prostrated herself
on the floor in front of Sarkar Munsi. In doing so, she treated Sarkar Munsi
as Rama incarnate, even though Sarkar Munsi had packed up her costume
and was wearing everyday clothes. As a modest young 22-year-old woman,
she felt uncomfortable when an elder treated her this way. In addition, and
much more problematically, even while Sarkar Munsi modeled her facial
expressions after a Sri Rama whose smile signified inner peace, Sri Rama
was being appropriated by Hindutva forces in relation to the destruction of
the Babri Masjid in Ayodhya on the alleged birthplace of Sri Rama (Gopal
1991). Sarkar Munsi concludes with reflections on why dancers are subjected
to (non-explicit) constraints on their agency in relation to events outside the
world of dance.
Rani’s essay provides an ethnographic account of the activities of audiences
at the Ramnagar Ramlila not only after, but also between enactments of
Rama’s deeds. While this Ramlila has received more scholarly scrutiny than
any other Ramayana-based performance in India, Rani has nonetheless
chosen a hitherto under-analyzed aspect of it: waiting. And since, unlike
Ramlila at any other site, the one at Ramanagar includes a month-long recita-
tion of the entire Rāmcaritmānas (often referred as “the Mānas”) by Tulsidas,
the daily time spent waiting after the enactments of individual episodes adds
up significantly. Between scenes, during the extended break for evening wor-
ship before the night’s performance, and then waiting for the auspicious mo-
ment for worship (ārti) at the end of each night, men in the audience nap or
22 Orientations and Beginnings
roam the grounds to greet friends and kin, drink tea, eat savories and sweets,
and exchange gossip.
Furthermore, the night before the dawn of the final day of the Ramlila,
Bhor Ārti, is the longest period of waiting, filled with the largest number of
activities other than watching or chanting Ramlila. Rather than going home
and returning in the early morning hours, lots of spectators, especially men,
spend the night at the site in activities infused with banārasīpan, the local
ethos of Varanasi/Banaras that centers on leisure and pleasure. Rani argues
that if one focuses only on the ritual drama without sufficient attention to the
everyday practices pursued when the ritual drama is not being enacted, one
misses a crucial part of the experience of attending the Ramlila of Ramnagar.
In Bharucha’s comments in Chapter 16, “The Challenges
Ahead: Researching the Ramayana Performance Tradition,” he reflects on
what occurs during enactment and what occurs beyond it. He also highlights
the larger implications of the political forces discussed in Sarkar Munsi’s
essay and the nature of the “everyday” documented in Rani’s essay. Finally,
he sets out some methodological issues to be considered for future research
about performing the Ramayana tradition: the challenge of translation, the
marginalization of the vocal registers in contrast to its psychophysical elem-
ents, the economics of grassroots and rural Ramayana performances, and the
crucial difference between diversity and plurality in understanding the larger
political resonances of the Ramayana tradition today.
Three texts have served as the most influential resources for the performances
analyzed in this volume: the oldest one, Valmiki’s Rāmāyaṇa; the ear-
liest devotional retelling in a regional literary language, Kamban’s Tamil
Irāmāvatāram; the most widely known one in North and Central India today,
the Awadhi Rāmcaritmānas by Tulsidas.
Performances featured in this volume confirm that Valmiki’s text
has served as a reference work for many playwrights. We have seen that
Tapassāṭṭam reinterprets the motivations of Ravana and Kaikasi while other-
wise holding tightly to the words of the Uttara-kāṇḍa attributed to Valmiki.
The same Uttara-kāṇḍa served as a key source when the Sanskrit scholar,
whom Usha had commissioned, consulted the Uttara-kāṇḍa’s account of
Mandodari’s parentage, birth, and marriage. In addition, a different debt—to
The Ramayana Narrative Tradition 23
the manner in which Valmiki’s Bāla-kāṇḍa presents the text’s own genesis
according to Sage Narada—is taken for granted in the prologue to Manohar’s
King of Lanka; there Ravana explains to Narada the correct way to tell the
Ramayana narrative, so the sage will no longer circulate an inaccurate one.
Two Tamil playwrights each draw on different parts of Kamban’s
Irāmāvatāram to engage with contemporary debates of their day. Manohar’s
Laṅkēswaraṉ follows Kamban by representing Ravana as a heroic chieftain-
ruler, an ideal praised in classical Tamil poetry. By investing him with more
nobility and grandeur than Valmiki does, Manohar tacitly acknowledges that
Tamil ideologues of his day had elevated Ravana, whom they view as their
unjustly betrayed ancestor, to a great Tamil hero. Nonetheless, Manohar’s
final scene still depicts Rama’s triumphant coronation after slaying Ravana,
in effect rejecting the ideologues’ claim that Rama was wrong to slay Ravana.
Half a century later, RāmaRāvaṇā quotes from Kamban for quite another
purpose. Rajagopal condemns Rama’s refusal to accept Sita back after cap-
tivity and points out that both he and Ravana used women as pawns in
their rivalry. Thus, Rajagopal speaks to present-day debates about women’s
equality by disagreeing with a fundamental premise in Kamban’s text.
The volume also analyzes Ramayana-based performances that do not draw
significantly from a specific text. Instead, Maya Krishna Rao’s Ravanama
contains multiple fragments from written, oral, ancient, and recent tellings
from the Ramayana tradition to highlight Ravana’s charisma. The Tenth
Head by Vinay Kumar contains few references to texts, but he cites other
Ramayana-based performances in his use of gesture and music. Rao and
Kumar each present original ways of thinking about Ravana and, in Kumar’s
case, the relations between his heads.
Despite widespread popularity in North and Central India, Rāmcaritmānas
appears only in a limited way in this volume due to at least three contin-
gent factors. First, Rani’s chapter on Ramlila focuses on what occurs after
enactments and chanting Rāmcaritmānas has ended for the scene or for the
day. Second, the Hindi playscripts analyzed by Sherraden focus on anti-caste
plays that enact Shambuk’s story as drawn from Valmiki’s text; the Uttara-
kāṇḍa by Tulsidas does not include Shambuk’s story. Third, many village
Ramlilas draw instead from Rādheśyām Rāmāyaṇ, a more accessible mid-
20th-century text in modern Hindi.27
27 Lothspeich (2013).
24 Orientations and Beginnings
28 Many textual scholars see the “outer kandas” (parts of the first and much of the last) as later
interpolations by a later hand, and the “middle kandas” as the work of Valmiki.
The Ramayana Narrative Tradition 25
deceitful Shurpanakha from the forest and virtuous Sita from the palace by
representing both females as beautiful and independent in their own right.
Moreover, the forest kanda contains some of the most dramatic episodes,
many of which have significant elaboration or alteration by playwrights
and performers. For example, Manohar radically alters Shurpanakha’s
proposal of marriage to Rama; his father married three wives, so she wants
to test whether Rama will remain faithful to Sita when he is propositioned.
Episodes from Kiṣkindhā-kāṇḍa appear in Yakshagana and
Talamaddale, particularly in prasangas by Parti Subba. A striking example
is a performance centered on an argument between Rama and Vali about
whether Rama deviated from dharma by shooting Vali while concealed
behind a tree. The prasanga seems tailor-made for Talamaddale since the
two characters debate about an incident which contains apparent ambigu-
ities or contradictions; the complexity of Vali’s death ensures that two ac-
tors have sufficient evidence to debate opposing claims.29 The episode thus
exemplifies an affinity between this kanda and Talamaddale conventions.
Conclusions
Readers should keep in mind that the volume does not claim that the
performances analyzed in this book—or the scene depicted on its cover—
represent the corpus of Ramayana performances as a whole. In the future,
other scholars will probably focus on a different set of productions, which
will help increase our knowledge of the diversity of such performances.
This volume’s editors and contributors do not attempt to draw sweeping
conclusions from their multiple findings. Instead, they seek to prompt,
rather than foreclose, further study of performances that draw on the
Ramayana tradition.
Although many texts retell the story of Rama and Sita in dif-
ferent ways, this volume’s primary emphasis is not on texts but on
performances, documenting how playwrights and performers have re-
envisioned episodes from the Ramayana tradition, from the first recita-
tion of Valmiki’s text to Usha Nangiar’s newly created solo on Sita in 2019.
Performing the Ramayana tradition remains an endeavor that grapples
29 For Vali’s slaying in the Ramnagar Ramlila, see Kapur (1990: 130–131); in Tamil-Malayalam
puppet plays, see Blackburn (1996: 82–94), in Teyyam possession rituals, see Freeman (2001).
26 Orientations and Beginnings
with ultimate concerns about duty, love, rule, and death. Since a range
of Ramayana-based performances have occurred so often over the centu-
ries, it is worth considering that when the newly decolonizing nation of
India selectively revived cultural narratives with the goal of uniting dis-
parate groups, Hindu nationalists chose the Ramayana narrative as a “na-
tional” epic that told of a golden age of perfect rule. Later, state-sponsored
Ramayana cultural events and the televised Rāmāyaṇ in the mid-1980s
claimed that they brought together texts from most regions of India into
one pan-Indian framework.
Yet, additional ways of interpreting and performing the narrative de-
veloped early in the history of its dissemination. This volume shows how
the same episode can take on diverse meanings and outcomes when
represented in accordance with conventions of specific performance
traditions, in addition to the political circumstances of a production
in a specific region. Performances analyzed in this volume show how
arguments and differing perspectives are an intrinsic part of the Ramayana
tradition.
Conflict between brothers recurs across the Ramayana narrative, as
suggested by the volume’s cover image. The ruling family of Ayodhya
presents the most idealized fraternal relations, in which Rama and
Bharata argue, each insisting that the other ascend the throne. In Lanka,
two brotherly options unfold: Kumbhakarna vociferously disagrees with
Ravana’s abduction of Sita yet sacrifices his life for Ravana in battle; in
contrast, although Vibhishana also argues with Ravana, he later betrays
kin and kingdom by revealing military intelligence about Lanka to Rama.
In Kishkindha, Sugriva and Vali fight over territorial rights and try to kill
each other. These three sets of siblings testify to the tensions that arise
between kings and their brothers. At a different level, the cover of this
volume calls to mind broader themes. Like most literary epics that have
been appropriated for political ends, the Ramayana narrative leads in-
exorably to a violence justified by sectarian constituencies. Debates that
develop about what defines proper action rest on discussions of moral
behavior that play a major role in retellings of the story. Finally, the ar-
gumentative mode itself can be seen as part of a narrative tradition that
encompasses many kinds of—at times—conflicting interpretations of
episodes over time and across regions.
The Ramayana Narrative Tradition 27
Bibliography
Bhattacharya, Pradip. 2019. The Panchakanya of India’s Epics: A Question in Search of
Meaning, 2nd revised edition. Kolkata: Writers Workshop.
Blackburn, Stuart. 1996. Inside the Drama-House: Rama Stories and Shadow Puppets in
South India. Berkeley: University of California Press.
Bose, Mandakranta, and Sarika Priyadarshini Bose, trans. 2013. A Woman’s
Ramayana: Candrāvatī’s Bengali Epic. London and New York: Routledge.
Cutler, Norman. 2003. “Three Moments in the Genealogy of Tamil Literary Culture.” In
Literary Cultures in History. Reconstructions from South Asia, ed. Sheldon Pollock, pp.
271–322. Berkeley: University of California Press.
Dharwadker, Aparna. 2005. Theaters of independence: Drama, Theory and Urban
Performance in India since 1947. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Freeman, Rich. 2001. “Thereupon Hangs a Tail: The Deification of Vāli in the Teyyam
Worship of Malabar.” In Questioning Ramayanas, a South Asian Tradition, ed. Paula
Richman, pp. 187–220, 384–390. Berkeley: University of California Press.
Goldman, Robert P., gen. ed. 1984–2017. The Rāmāyaṇa of Vālmīki, an Epic of Ancient
India, 7 vols. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Goldman, Robert P., trans. 1984. The Ramayana of Valmiki: An Epic of Ancient India, Vol.
1: Balakanda. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Goldman, Robert P., and Sally J. Sutherland Goldman, trans. 2017. The Rāmāyaṇa of
Vālmīki, an Epic of Ancient India, Vol. VII: Uttarakāṇḍa. Princeton, NJ: Princeton
University Press.
Gopal, Sarvepalli, ed. 1991. Anatomy of a Confrontation: The Babri Masjid-
Ramjanmabhumi Issue. New Delhi: Penguin Books India.
Hawley, John Stratton. 1981. At Play with Krishna: Pilgrimage Dramas from Brindavan.
Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Hein, Norvin. 1972. The Miracle Plays of Mathura. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
Hess, Linda. 2006. “The Open- Air Ramayana: Ramlila, the Audience Experience.”
In The Life of Hinduism, eds. John S. Hawley and Vasudha Narayanan, pp. 115–139.
Berkeley: University of California Press.
Indira Gandhi National Centre for the Arts program. November 23–29, 2015. New Delhi.
Jones, Clifford Reis, V. Raghavan, D. Leela, A. Nambudrippad, and Betty True Jones. 1984.
The Wondrous Crest-Jewel in Performance: Text and Translation of the Āścaryacūḍāmaṇi
of Śaktibhadra with the Production Manual from the Tradition of Kūṭiyāṭṭtam in
Sanskrit Drama. Delhi: Oxford University Press and American Institute of Indian
Studies.
Juergensmeyer, Mark. 1982. Religion as Social Vision: The Movement against Untouchability
in 20th Century Punjab. Berkeley: University of California Press.
Kapur, Anuradha. 1990 [1985]. Actors, Pilgrims, Kings and Gods: The Ramlila at
Ramnagar. Calcutta: Seagull Press.
Kumar, Nita. 1995: “Class and Gender Politics in the Ramlila.” In The Gods at Play: Lila in
South Asia, ed. William Sax, pp. 156–176. New York: Oxford University Press.
Kunjunni Raja, K. 1964. Kutiyattam: An Introduction. New Delhi: Sangeet Natak Akademi.
Leslie, Julia. 2005. “The Implications of Bhakti for the Story of Valmiki.” In The Intimate
Other: Love Divine in Indic Religions, eds. Anna S. King and John Brockington, pp. 54–
77. Hyderabad: Orient Longman.
28 Orientations and Beginnings
Lothspeich, Pamela, ed. Spring 2020 (Special Issue). “The Field of Ramlila.” Asian Theatre
Journal 37:1: 1–245.
Lothspeich, Pamela. 2013. “The Radheshyam Ramayan and the Sanskritization of Khari
Boli Hindi.” Modern Asian Studies 47: 1–34.
Lynch, Owen M. 1969. The Politics of Untouchability: Social Mobility and Social Change in
a City of India. New York: Columbia University Press.
Medhi, Kaliram, ed. 1997 [1948]. [English] “Introduction.” In Aṅkāvalī, pp. 1– 80.
Guwahati: Lawyers Book Stall on behalf of Kaliram Medhi Trust.
Narayana Rao, Velcheru. 2001. “The Politics of Telugu Ramayanas: Colonialism, Print
Culture, and Literary Movements.” In Questioning Ramayanas, a South Asian Tradition,
ed. Paula Richman, pp. 159–185, 382–384. Berkeley: University of California Press.
Pollock, Sheldon. 1993. “Rāmāyaṇa and Political Imagination.” Journal of Asian Studies
52:2: 261–297.
Pollock, Sheldon, trans. 1986. The Rāmāyaṇa of Vālmīki, an Epic of Ancient India. Vol. II,
Ayodhyākāṇḍa. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Pollock, Sheldon, trans. 2007. Rama’s Last Act by Bhavabhuti. Clay Sanskrit Library.
New York: New York University Press.
Raghavan, V. 1984. “Introduction to the Translation of the Play.” In Wondrous Crest-Jewel
in Performance: Text and Translation of the Āścaryacūḍāmaṇi of Śaktibhadra with the
Production Manual from the Tradition of Kūṭiyāṭṭtam in Sanskrit Drama, ed. Clifford
Jones, pp. 1–26. Delhi: Oxford University Press and American Institute of Indian
Studies.
Richman, Paula, ed. 1991. Many Ramayanas: The Diversity of a Narrative Tradition in
South Asia. Berkeley: University of California Press.
Richman, Paula. 2004. “Why Can’t a Shudra Perform Asceticism? Śambūka in Three
Modern South Indian Plays.” In Ramayana Revisited, ed. Mandakranta Bose, pp. 125–
148. New York: Oxford University Press.
Satchidanandan, K. 2005. “The Ramayana in Kerala.” In Retelling the Ramayana: Voices
from Kerala, trans., Vasanthi Sankaranarayanan, pp. 145–150. New Delhi: Oxford
University.
Sattar, Arshia, trans. 2016. Uttara: The Book of Answers. Gurgaon: Penguin Books.
Schechner, Richard, and Linda Hess. 1977. “Ramlila of Ramnagar.” The Drama Review
21:3: 51–82.
Sherraden, Aaron. 2019. The Many Deaths of Śambūka: A History of a Rāmāyaṇa Story.
Ph.D. dissertation, Department of Asian Studies, University of Texas, Austin.
Smith, W. L. 1995. Rāmāyaṇa in Eastern India: Assam, Bengal, Orissa, 2nd revised edition.
New Delhi: Munshiram Manoharlal Publishers.
Varadpande, M. L. 2007. Mahabharata in Performance. New Delhi: Clarion Books.
Vatsyayan, Kapila Malik. 1975. Ramayana in the Arts of Asia. Teheran: Asian Cultural
Documentation Center for UNESCO.
Williams, Joanna. 1996. The Two-Headed Deer: Illustrations of the Ramayana in Orissa.
Berkeley: University of California Press.
Yohannan, Rizio Raj, trans. 2008. “Sita Immersed in Reflection.” In Ramayana
Stories in Modern South India: An Anthology, ed. Paula Richman, pp. 64– 87.
Bloomington: Indiana University Press.