Friday, November 27, 2009

Mysogyny and Memory

So...I've been thinking a bit about the relationships between the men and women in Shakuntala, and I have noticed a bit of mysogyny in the story. For instance, the main text we've been using only briefly alludes to Queen Vetravati's frustrations after being 'abandoned' by her husband- I wonder why this is so? Was polygamy the norm in the 6th century? It seems like an awkward blip in what would otherwise be a classic love story....
Also, Shakuntala herself has very little agency, and always seems to be at the mercy of men. Her father abandoned her because she reminded him of his 'unholy' actions. Dushyanta's rejection renders her powerless... The feminist in me cringes when- in the end of the rejection scene- Shakuntala cries out "He has deceived me shamelessly. And will you leave me too?" and Sharngarava says, "...Do you dare show independence? If you deserve such scorn and blame what will your father with your shame?" If it weren't for the Chaplain and the protection of the Gods Shakuntala would be left out on the streets to fend for herself.
This leads me to the theme of memory which we've been exploring in the piece- George mentioned that in the Mahabharata, there is no curse from Durvasas which makes Dushyanta forget Shakuntala- he just does. Kalidasa could not bear this, so he adds Durvasas and his curse to the play to provide a kind of dramatic reconciliation of what is unclear or vague in the original story. But what if King Dushyanta really just forgets? He forgot his first wife easily enough, it's likely he could forget Shakuntala just as easily. Is Kalidasa simply making excuses for Dushyanta in the same way we make excuses for modern politicians who claim to 'forget' why they make choices which prove harmful to their constituents or engage in corrupt practices?
As artists, are we using the story to address one social concern, while 'forgetting' to address another?
What are your thoughts Magisties?
~~~Colista

4 comments:

George said...

Thanks Colista, this topic merits attention again. In some of the previous posts, the company has discussed these points in terms of the dramaturgy and the intention of the author. And yet for us as we adapt the script, my main principle has been to see how we can present this text to a contemporary audience in a way that they can hear it. Now, of course, in order to hear something one has to continue listening, and there are details in the story that make us want to stop listening when the 5th century crashes up against the 21st. It reminds me of a time when I was in East Africa and a teacher of mine used a proverb to illustrate a grammatical point but I stopped listening because of the content. His proverb was "Mke mmoja ni jicho moja" or "One wife is one eye." Of course the westerners in the room were aghast, myself probably the most aghast of them all. It was a shock to learn that the issue of polygamy is not a thing of the past. Now, is a Long Island, Ukrainian-American, suburban mzunugu going to have any credibility in a discussion about this issue in an East African context? You tell me.
Did that stop me from raising the question? You've known me long enough, and the Long Islander in me rises up to say "what do you think?" I guess this story is meant to discuss the difficulty of discussion, and the necessity of it. Yes polygamy was the norm in the village in East Africa where I studied. Yes, polygamy was the norm in India in the 5th century. However... we must ALSO read the Mahabharata (and I do consider even Kalidasa's retelling still a Mahabharata story) not in the way we read Albee but in the way we read Sappho. These are myths. How many "husbands" did Aphrodite have?
We take myths differently than we take history. Still our job will be to keep the discussion going in a context which is as "informed" as possible.
In terms of Shakuntala's lack of agency... I think Kalidasa stacks the deack against her not because he hates women or thinks they should (like Hello Kitty) have no mouth... BUT so that he, Kalidasa, can stress how courageous she is. Shakuntala TAKES agency where none is permitted and I think that is why Kalidasa makes her the hero/heroine, and why the world fell in love with her. She is a champion for those who are in situations like hers where agency is not "permitted" but must be taken anyway.

Margi said...

Thanks Colista for a provocative look at the text and thanks George for a wise answer. The way the Queens are dealt with in our current text has always struck me as strange. The good and wise King as he is often called not only forgets Shakuntala but seems to forget or want to forget his other wives and certainly Queen Vasumati. She laments his neglect in a song at the palace.

I have thought that his neglect/rejection of her is a comment on the Queen’s character (the Clown calls her the she-tiger of the palace). She is perhaps not the ideal match for the King. But she never really has a voice beyond the singing practice so it is left to our imagination.

A few of us were talking tonite after rehearsal about how it is confusing in the unveiling scene how Sharngarava blames the King’s marriage to another woman for his forgetting of Shakuntala as though he has just newly married one Queen. It may be hard for a modern audience to understand a/ that he has several wives/Queens and b/that it is the norm in that time based on what is given in the script. I hope we will be able to make it clear for them via staging.

And in terms of women in the larger context of the play, Shakuntala’s experience reminds me of so many of the women in Shakepeare’s plays who rise above the situation and whirlwind of words around them by doing something bigger than their male counterparts. Shakuntala’s generosity reminds me of Hermione in the Winter’s Tale who chooses to forgive her husband and thereby brings redemption and renewal to the kingdom.

Erika said...

I think there are points on both sides here. My first instinct upon reading the script was "We're going to have to take out the other queens." It's an interesting challenge to highlight the fact that Dushyanta views adultery as sleeping with another man's wife (which he percieves Shakuntala must be since she is pregnant), but does not show any real regret about his multiple wives feeling neglected.

Sharngarava's comment makes sense in the context of the entrance as we have staged it-- he sees the other queens and thinks that poor Shakuntala has simply been forgotten by a man who is surrounded constantly by beautiful women. : )

I think both George and Colista are right-- Shakuntala does live in a world where women do not have much agency. And yet she does dare to write a love song, she jokes with her friends, she confronts the king in the midst of the court and against the advice of her brothers. She raises her son alone, but when Dushyanta finally comes to her, she forgives him. Like my first reaction as a teenager upon reading The Winter's Tale, we may not at first understand this extraordinary act of generosity. Our job in presenting the play is to make Shakuntala and Dushyanta real human beings, who ultimately go beyond their societal norms to join in an equal partnership at the end of the play.

Anonymous said...

Intrestingly enough, there is even a bit of text that says that Dushyanta pretends to forget her because he fears that the people of the palace would not take Shakuntala seriously.