THE HISTORY OF THE THEATRE MOVEMENT IN KERALA A FEMINIST READING

It is most vital to have a knowledge of the living conditions of the Malayalee women during the period of genesis of theatre in Kerala, for without it, the history of the feminist theatre movement would be deemed incomplete. In those days, did Malayalee women get an opportunity to come to the forefront of the public domain as a writer, director as actor? Was she bold enough to unchain her body and mind for such a theatrical performance? Several socioeconomic factors related to the Malayalee women at the fag end of the nineteenth century, including her body language, manner of dressing and education, play a crucial role in deciding her involvement in the theatre. The outstanding factor that captures the attention of anyone who analyses the state of women in Kerala during the nineteenth century, is the fact that the most rigid rules of aristocracy were dependent for women. There were several unwritten rules regarding the code of conduct of women belonging to different castes of the society. Some of them including a woman not being supposed to be seen by any other man except her husband, not expected to let her hair loose etc., were as stringent as those imposed during the menstrual period.1 Caste was the crucial factor in deciding the dress code of women in society. An Ezhava woman was not allowed to wear a mundu which reached below here knees while a Nair woman was permitted to wear a mundu (Achipudava) that went below her knees. None of the Hindu women, except

2 Antharjanams who travelled outside in Khosha, were allowed to cover the upper part of the body above the waist. History has recorded the great revolt that erupted when certain converted Channar women of Southern Travancore attempted to cover the upper part of their body.2 The author of Kochi Rajyacharitram has remarked that it is indeed shameful for Maharaja Ramavarma to have issued a proclamation demanding that Nair women should remove their blouses in order to enter temples, at the outset of the twentieth century, when it was widely perceived to be disgraceful for women to travel outside without covering their bosom.3 There are several instances of women who dared to break these laws beings subjugated to severe torture. The upper castes were so outraged by a Channar Womans daring act of walking through the streets of Kayamkulam with a piece of cloth covering her bosom that they forcibly removed it and attached a tender coconut fruit to her nipples.4 A commotion is said to have erupted when a group of Nair men forced an Ezhava woman to remove her mundu for having dared to wear it, reaching below her knees.5 C. Kesavan reminisces regarding the events following the Travancore Diwan, Sir T. Madhavarayars order prohibiting the lower caste womens attempts to imitate the upper caste womens right of covering their bosom. These included the challenging of this order by the Madras Governor Sir Charles Treveleyan and the subsequent developments thus: The gist of it was that the mighty British empire was ruled by a woman who would never pardon the insult heaped upon the womanhood of her sisters,

3 a fact to be borne in mind by the ruler of Travancore. A threat was also raised that if the need arose the problem would be resolved with the bayonet subsequently a proclamation was issued granting freedom to wear any dress to anyone As a mark of celebration of the freedom of women, one of my maternal ancestors even distributed dhotis among Ezhava women to cover their bosom.6 The use of blouse to cover the breasts was frowned upon still further as blouse was considered alien to the culture of Kerala and looked upon as a symbol of religious conversion. The act of wearing blouse was considered as a sign of haughtiness and a part of dressing up. In his autobiography Jeevithasamaram, C. Kesavan has narrated how his mother was scolded by her mother-in-law when she wore a blouse for the first time. It also mirrors the contempt for female artists. Where the hell are you going capering?7 . . . Remove it . . . You voluptuous dancer, dressed like a non-Hindu woman in a blouse.8 The underlying suggestion evidently remains that singing and dancing were all the hereditary occupation of prostitutes. Malayalam Theatre took

shape in a social environment where the identity of a dancer was deemed unfit for women belonging to aristocratic families. The Kerala society of those times placed severe constrains on the Malayalee womans manner of dressing, behaviour and the public space where she could freely move about, which forced her to seek solace in folk and classical art forms to express herself. But as a part of the new identity which she seemed to have acquired towards the end of the nineteenth century, the Kerala woman seemed to be losing out even on these. It was not substituted with the new stage arts. There were numerous

4 women who were exceptionally gifted in language, literature and the Puranas but none of them were educated in the present day sense. In his article entitled The most important Incident of my Life.9 C.V.Kunjiraman speaks of a young, scholarly lady who taught him to read and explain the meaning of the Ramayana ,four or five years before he turned fifteen, praising her expertise to render verses of the epic in different ragas. He also dwells at length on the skill of a great aunt of his, born at the beginning of the nineteenth century, to read and write. . . . There is a widespread misconception that school education commenced only recently, especially with regard to Ezhava women. My great aunt was a real exception who, as long as her eye-sight was sound, used to read the Ramayana late into the evening as long as there was sufficient light.9. The social identity of women at the time when the theatre was taking shape in Kerala encompassed all the above cited complexities. Therefore

there were several conditions that were both conducive and non-conducive for women to become a part of the staging and acting of plays in those days which are to be borne in mind while analyzing the early stages of the womens

theatre movement. Early plays by women It was in 1890 that Angjathavasam10, a play dealing with the Pandavas anonymous stay depicted in the Mahabharata, came out in Malayalam. Modelled after Sanskrit plays, it was written by Thankachi, the first woman playwright in Malayalam. . . as per records. Observers commented that the play was confined just to be read and enjoyed by the literati, yet there were

5 certain gems hidden here and there in a work that was not altogether bad. 11 Despite being equally known as the others dramatists of the period, her work has never found a place in the annals of the theatre history of Kerala. Another lady who wrote a drama after Kuttikunju Thankachis Angjathavasam was Thottakkattu Ikkavamma, the author of Subhadrarjunam. Subhadrarjunam surely deserves a place of pride among the independent language plays of the period. The Lords of Kodungalloor, who were great poets, alone had written such plays till then. Kuttikunju Thankachis Angjathavasam was the sole exception to this. Subhadrarjunam, published

towards the end of 1891, was the second play written by a woman.12 Ikkavamma had firm faith that women had the same right and were as capable as men to entertain and engage the attentions of the literati. When a false rumour spread that her works were written by Mannadiar, Vidya Vinodini of those times mentioned that she deserves to be called the

Thunchathezhuthachan of the female sex.13

It will be impossible for any

reader of Subhadrarjunam to claim that she has no knowledge of the theatrical art. The scattered observations regarding stage directions and acting found in the play bear testimony to a very mature dramatic composition. The famous scholar Karamana Keshava Shastrikal had translated this play into Sanskrit at that period itself. The plays popularity is evident from the way in which it was written about and discussed in the newspapers and periodicals of those days. Thottakkattu Ikkavamma was much influenced by the transformations taking place in the theatre at that time and was more involved with all these, than was possible for a woman of that period.

6 At around this time Kerala was gradually getting acquainted with Tamil Musical plays. Simultaneously C. Achutamenon composed Sangeeta-

Naishadham, thirty four thousand copies of which were sold in 1892 itself, the year of publication of the play. He undertook the composition of the play under the active encouragement of his maternal sister Ikkavamma. Ikkavamma of Thrissur Ramanchira Madham happened to watch Kerala Varma Valiya Koyi Thampurans play Abhingjana Sakuntalam staged by Manomohanam company and invited them over to Thrissur. This presentation was greatly influenced by Tamil drama and had little musical merit in it. Her wish expressed to her

nephew that a play free from the effect of Tamil Theatre should be created, sowed the seeds for Naishadham.14 Apart from composing the play, Achutamenon also demonstrated his histrionics by playing the part of the forest-dweller. When the play was staged in Thrissur in 1892, Ikkavamma played the role of Nala and Ambadi Govinda Menon acted as Damayanti.15 This account will suffice to prove that Ikkavamma was not only one of the earliest women to have mastered play righting but also stage activities in the true spirit. On the basis of the

information available, she remains the first woman to have acted in a Malayalam drama. Why did she not don the role of a woman? Did she

deliberately choose the guise of man to conceal her womanhood from the society? From Ikkavamma, the lady who concealed her identity behind the mask of a man, the theatrical history of Kerala marched forward to the world of musical drama where male actors donned the role of women. Thus the advent

7 of women added a new chapter to the stage language of musical drama in Malayalam which forms a major phase in the history of the theatre in Kerala. * * * * * * * * *

1. Bhaskaranunni. P, Pathombatham Noottandile Keralam. Kerala Sahitya Academy, Thrissur, 1988. 2. Ibid. 3. Padmanabha Menon, K.P., Kochi Rajyacharitram. 4. Bhaskaranunni. P., Pathombatham Noottandile Keralam. Kerala Sahitya Academy, Thrissur, 1988. 5. Arattupuzha Velayudha Panickker, P.O.Kunjupanikker, S.N.D.P. Yogam, Kanakajubilee Smaraka Grantham, 1953. 6. Ibid. 7. Ibid. 8. Ibid. 9. Puthuppalli Raghavan (Ed.) C.V.Kunjuramante Thiranjedutha Krithikal, Kaumudi Public Relations, Thiruvananthapuram, 2002. 10. Bhaskaran Nair, V., (Ed) Kuttikunju Thankachiyude Kritikal (1979), Kerala Sahitya Academy, Thrissur. 11. Ulloor S. Parameswara Iyer, Kerala Sahityacharitram Vol.4 (1974) Kerala University Publications Department, (1974), 273. 12. Ulloor S. Parameswara Iyer, Kerala Sahitya Charitram Vol.4 (1974) Kerala University Publications Department, 681. 13. Thottakkattu Ikkavamma, Subhadrarjunam (1891). Prof. P. Sankaran Nambiar Foundation, Thrissur, 2002.

8 14. Ulloor S. Parameswara Iyer, Kerala Sahitya Charitram, Vol.4 (1974), Kerala University Publications Department, 497. 15. Madavoor Bhasi, Malayala Nadaka Sarwaswam (1990). Chaitanya Publications, Vattiyoorkkavu, Thiruvananthapuram. *****