Assignment - Literary Theory and Criticism 2

An Application of Rasa Theory in the Play ‘Hamlet’ of Shakespeare


Name- Kavisha Alagiya

Paper 7- Literary Theory and Criticism 2

Roll No- 10

Enrollment no.- 2069108420200001

Email id- kavishaalagiya@gmail.com

Batch – MA 2019-21

Submitted to - Smt S. B. Gardi Department of English






Contents

1. Introduction. 2

2. Indian Poetics. 2

3. Shakespeare- From the English Language to Indian Poetics. 5

4. Rasa Theory. 6

5. Application of Rasa Theory. 8

6. Conclusion. 12


7. Works Cited. 14




Introduction


Indian Poetics is believed to be the most ancient literary as well as philosophical discussion of Sanskrit Literature. As the language Sanskrit is called the language of gods (Dev-Vani), common folks are unable to read and grasp the meaning of the language in a clear way. So to make these people aware of the richness and productivity of aesthetics, perhaps, great Sanskrit scholars had propagated various theories in the vast canon which now came to be known as Indian Poetics.

This Sanskrit Criticism is also known as ‘Kavya Mimamsa’ which is an umbrella for various schools developed by scholarly thinkers. The main aim of this assignment is to properly understand the two major schools of the vast field of Indian poetics and try to apply the one major school of Indian Poetics in the selected work of the most important ingredient of English Literature Household.

G. B. Harrison begins his book with the following lines-

No household in the English-speaking world is properly furnished unless it contains the copies of the Holy Bible and The Works of William Shakespeare (Harrison)

Whereas K.R.S. Srinivas Iyengar in his work titled “Shakespeare in India” quotes Landor,

Shakespeare is not our poet, but the world’s.” (Iyengar)

Here the universality of William Shakespeare can be measured in terms of not only as a poet but also as a dramatist who weaved all the common aspects of the life of common people. His works can, therefore, be considered as extraordinary materials full of ordinary lives.



Indian Poetics


It is often said that “Our surrounding is a game and we are a part of it”. This has a connection with what has been recorded in Sanskrit literature-

कवि:  करोति काव्यानि रसं जानाति पंडित:  |

तरु: सृजति पुष्पाणि मरुद्वहती सौरभं   ||


The plant produces a flower but it is the wind that carries its fragrance everywhere similarly the poet writes the poem but the efforts are all to be enjoyed by the wise men that are expected to have the scholarly sense. So as a part of the game, one should possess the aesthetic as well as the scholarly sense in order to be able to transmit the artistic codes which the Sanskrit scholars have propagated.



Indian Poetics focuses more on the poetic process whereas Western Poetics is all about the end product and perhaps because of this deliberation Indian Poetics is honored throughout the world. The major pioneers of Indian Poetics are-




The remarkable quality of Indian Poetics is in its varied richness which provides a clear, comprehensive and universally applicable critical system. ‘Natyasastra’ is the oldest and the most extensive work on Indian dramaturgy. The authorship of this treatise is ascribed to Bharatmuni.


‘It is the most important and authoritative treatise on Sanskrit dramaturgy, for not very long after its composition, it seems to have been held in high esteem so that the succeeding writers have merely followed this work.’ (Singh)

There are various schools proposed by the thinkers among which this assignment focuses on the Rasa theory or School and its application.




Shakespeare- From the English Language to Indian Poetics

                  
“All the world's a stage,
And all the men and women merely players;
They have their exits and their entrances,
And one man in his time plays many parts,
His acts being seven ages.” (Shakespeare)

[Opening lines from a monologue by Jaques in ‘As You Like It’]
From these lines that Shakespeare takes his audience on a journey of the life cycle of a human being to

“To be or not to be that’s the question” (Shakespeare)

where the intellectual power and the power of expression is at the highest, described the sins and weakness of human beings in the grave tone. Two theories have been proposed that try to explain the greatness of Shakespeare among which one says- “All came from within” and the other believes in “All came from without”. As he was a man who lived in the play loving age, some critics believe that he was the master of reading crowds, he as a dramatist used to feed the mass with the spoon full of reflection of their own thoughts and feelings. Shakespeare has been in the veins of the majority of the Indians since the English shared the bond with colonial purposes. Initially, for clerical education, the colonizers have established certain colleges to educate people on their language. The imperial domains of English Language and Macaulay’s education system are credited for bringing William Shakespeare’s works on this varied cultural land. The thoughts of Shakespeare are so naturalized now that hardly a work without his inspiration is produced. The events and situations which he portrayed in 16th century are still applicable in the 21st century. Perhaps, this universality made him one of the most admired and the most read dramatist of India. His works cannot be classified into a particular genre as because he used to weave all the human emotions into one play as Dr. Samuel Johnson points out,

Shakespeare’s plays are not in the rigorous and critical sense either tragedies or comedies, but compositions of a distinct kind; exhibiting the real state of sublunary nature, which partakes of good and evil, joy and sorrow, mingled with endless variety of proportion and innumerable modes of combination; and expressing the course of the world, in which the loss of one is the gain of another; in which, at the same time, the reveller is hasting to his wine, and the mourner burying his friend; in which the malignity of one is sometimes defeated by the frolick of another; and many mischiefs and many benefits are done and hindered without design.” (Das and Mohanty)



Rasa Theory


The word ‘Rasa’ was originally used to denote a variety of meanings, such as ‘drink’, ‘water’, or ‘mercury’. In Sanskrit aesthetics this term was employed in the context of drama which later was extended to poetry. Bharata emerged the doctrine of Rasa to denote taste, relish, sentiment or aesthetic emotion in his treatise ‘Natyasastra’ which is concerned with the emotional effect of the drama on the audience.

According to the Upanishads, “the ultimate Reality is the all-pervading existence (sat) the nature of which is absolute consciousness (cit) and delight (ananda). Rasa is the synonym of this absolute delight or ananda.”

To Bharata, the main purpose of dramatic creation or enactment is the evaluation of Rasa as because he believes that-

Without Rasa drama can have no appeal to the spectator

Na hi rasadrite kashchid arthah pravartate’

Rasa can be called the intrinsic aesthetic element of drama. It can be broadly understood by ‘vakyartha’. The ‘artha’ par excellence is rasa.
Bharata analyses the process and method of rasa evolution in his famous sutra-

“Vibhavanubhava- vyabhichari samyogad rasanish-pattih”

Rasa is the ultimate result of combination of vibhavas (causes), anubhavas (effects), and vyabhicharis (accessories).

Furthermore, Bharata explains his point with an analogy-

‘just as Rasa (flavor) results from the combination of various spices, herbs and other substances (dravyas), so does rasa in a drama come from the combination of ‘bhavas’.’

The sthayi bhavas are called permanent emotions which crystallise into rasa with the company of bhavas. Bharata’s explanation of rasa may not answer all the problems arising out of it, but they were fully discussed by his commentators like Bhatta Lollata, Shankuka, Bhatta-nayaka and Abinavagupta.


Rasa



Sthaýibhav

Presiding deity

Color

Śrigāra (शृङ्गारः): [The erotic]

Romance, Love, attractiveness.


Vishnu

light green

Hāsyam (हास्यं): [the comic]

Laughter, mirth, comedy.


Shiva.

white

Veeram (वीरं): [heroic]

Heroism.:


Indra.

saffron

Kāruyam (कारुण्यं): [compassionate]


Compassion, mercy.


Yama

grey

Raudram (रौद्रं): [wrathful]

Fury.


Shiva

red

Bībhatsam (बीभत्सं): [disgusting]

Disgust, aversion.



Shiva

blue

Bhayānakam (भयानकं): [terrifying]

Horror, terror.




Yama

black

Adbhutam (अद्भुतं): [awesome]

Wonder, amazement.



Brahma



yellow

The Shanta Rasa was added later.


Application of Rasa Theory


Shakespeare is often assumed to be the creator of new tragic realm. With Shakespeare, a new tragic pattern begins to emerge, very much richer and deeper than the old one, sounding intimately the depths of the human mind and spirit, and the moral possibilities of human behavior, and displaying the extent to which men’s destinies are interrelated with one another. Besides being a mere tragedy, the play ‘Hamlet’ is remarkable for its richness and variety, its fullness of interesting characters, each one a developed personality along with a plot full of twists and turns with a multitude of flavors so that the play appears to be a mixed work not exclusively devoted to a tragic pattern.

The soliloquies heavily loaded with meanings can reveal the intensity of the actor through his words that fulfill the purpose of Rasa with the significance of language, its universality as the experimental form. This differentiation of the poetic expression from the ordinary expression plays a major role in conveying the meaning with vyanjana. It is mentioned that Rasa is never expressed, it is always suggested. So Rasa is conveyed through vyanjana and is always vyangaya.

‘In the case of Hamlet, the protagonist occupies a central position in the generation of emotions. As can be seen later, with a few exceptions, the whole emotional process of the viewer revolves around Hamlet.’ (Mohanty)

Hamlet is a suffering hero who enjoys a higher degree of empathy from the audience.

Here is a comprehensive analysis of the play with the binoculars of Rasa theory.

Act 1 Scene 1 is full of tension and supernatural mystery. It provides the information about a King who had killed a Norwegian monarch. 

HORATIO

It harrows me with fear and wonder. [Hamlet page 7]

A mote it is to trouble the mind's eye. [Hamlet page 10]

Horatio sees the ghost of Hamlet’s father King Hamlet with his own eyes; he was very much perturbed and agitated at the sight of the ghost. Horatio is perturbed which arouses the Bhayānakam Rasa- the frightful terror. The scene is black and dark with a gloomy atmosphere. The apparition provides terror in the minds 0f the audience.

HORATIO

As thou art to thyself:
Such was the very armour he had on
When he the ambitious Norway combated;
So frown'd he once, when, in an angry parle,
He smote the sledded Polacks on the ice.
'Tis strange. [Hamlet page 9]

The above-mentioned lines arouse Vira rasa, the heroic description of the battle fought by the King and the legendary description of the armor the king wore while he fought the ambitious king of Norway. And the ghost repelled just like the king. This frowning of the ghost was the same as the king’s frown when he attacked the poles.

Furthermore, Horatio’s lines reveal the superstitions which perhaps generate amazement in the minds of the audience. The bhayanaka rasa is found within these lines-

HORATIO

In the most high and palmy state of Rome,
A little ere the mightiest Julius fell,
The graves stood tenantless and the sheeted dead
Did squeak and gibber in the Roman streets:  [Hamlet page 10]

The apparition signified some threat or disaster that may happen to the country. He recalls the past year before the death of Julies Caesar, the graves opened and the dead covered with white sheets walked about the streets of Rome and made horrible noises. This way the bhayanaka rasa is generated and the audience is bound to feel this scene with terror. Thus fear rules the scene.

The second scene fills the audience with Jugupsa Rasa or Bībhatsa rasa where they feel disgusted with the doings of Queen Gertrude. Her hasty marriage with Claudius makes his son Hamlet totally numb and his aversion is artfully exhibited through these lines-

HAMLET

O, that this too too solid flesh would melt
Thaw and resolve itself into a dew!
….
As if increase of appetite had grown
By what it fed on: and yet, within a month—
Let me not think on't—Frailty, thy name is woman!—
A little month, or ere those shoes were old
With which she follow'd my poor father's body,
Like Niobe, all tears:—why she, even she—
O, God! a beast, that wants discourse of reason,
Would have mourn'd longer—married with my uncle,
My father's brother, but no more like my father
Than I to Hercules: within a month:
Ere yet the salt of most unrighteous tears
Had left the flushing in her galled eyes,
She married. O, most wicked speed, to post
With such dexterity to incestuous sheets! [Hamlet page 18]

This scene generates extreme disgusting effects in the minds of the spectators where they can feel the pain in the highest form. The bhava which emerges is that of fear and guilt along with rage. Hamlet’s mood of ignorance or dejection makes the spectators aware of the ‘incest’.

Ghost

Ay, that incestuous, that adulterate beast,
With witchcraft of his wit, with traitorous gifts,—
O wicked wit and gifts, that have the power
So to seduce!—won to his shameful lust
The will of my most seeming-virtuous queen:
O Hamlet, what a falling-off was there! [Hamlet page 40]

This revelation by the apparition reveals the feeling of rage for the spectator with the emotion of the prince Hamlet. The Claudius’ wicked crime is transmitted to Hamlet and manifests itself as raudra rasa. The furious words of the apparition demonstrate the hideous acts of Claudius and the spectators are left gobsmacked for a while.

Hasya rasa is suggested in the scenes of Polonius and Hamlet where Polonius tries to discover Hamlet’s lunacy and initially witnesses the Hamlet’s lunatic behavior.

HAMLET

Slanders, sir: for the satirical rogue says here
that old men have grey beards, that their faces are
wrinkled, their eyes purging thick amber and
plum-tree gum and that they have a plentiful lack of
wit, together with most weak hams: all which, sir,
though I most powerfully and potently believe, yet
I hold it not honesty to have it thus set down, for
yourself, sir, should be old as I am, if like a crab
you could go backward. [Hamlet page 64]

Here, Hamlet’s harsh remarks to Polonius generate a comic kind of situation where somewhere the spectators can feel a bond with Hamlet when he smashes the face of Polonius with satirical retorts. The win-win kind of situation relives the spectators and deepens the connection with the protagonist.

Besides this, the gravedigger’s scene becomes noteworthy which creates a comic situation. Furthermore, at a time two rasas can be experienced in the following lines-

HAMLET

I loved Ophelia: forty thousand brothers
Could not, with all their quantity of love,
Make up my sum. [Hamlet page 178]

On one hand, Prince Hamlet expresses his love for Ophelia can be an illustration of Śrigāra rasa where his romance is expressed in the form of words but at the same time the Karuna rasa is generated in the play because of Hamlet is too late in his expression, his delay has cost Ophelia’s life, and she has gone mad because she was rudely insulted by the prince. Mercy and pity along with pathos are suggested by her death. The spectators can literally feel the pathetic end of Ophelia.

Conclusion


In a nutshell, it can be said that the Rasa theory adds a new dimension to examine the work of William Shakespeare from a critical point of view of Sanskrit theory. The Rasa School adds a new dimension to taste the work of art from nine different spoons of creative cuisine. Furthermore, ‘Hamlet’ as a play perhaps is not limited to a particular genre but it is like a salad bowl where all the ingredients are placed which makes it difficult for the spectator to recognize the particular rasa of the play. 



Works Cited


1. Das, B. and J. M. Mohanty. Literary Criticism A Reading. New Delhi: Oxford University Press, 1985.
2. Chaudhury, Pravas Jivan. “Indian Poetics.” The Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism, vol. 24, no. 1, 1965, pp. 197–204. JSTOR, www.jstor.org/stable/428209. Accessed 6 Mar. 2020.
3. Harrison, George Bagshawe. Introducing Shakespeare. New York: Penguin Books, 1947.
4. Iyengar, K. R. Srinivasa. “Shakespeare in India.” Indian Literature, vol. 7, no. 1, 1964, pp. 1–11. JSTOR, www.jstor.org/stable/23329674. Accessed 6 Mar. 2020.
5. Mohanty, Sangeeta. The Indian response to Hamlet: Shakespeare's reception in India and a study of" Hamlet" in sanskrit poetics. Diss. University_of_Basel, 2010.
6. Saunders, Virginia. “Some Literary Aspects of the Absence of Tragedy in the Classical Sanskrit Drama.” Journal of the American Oriental Society, vol. 41, 1921, pp. 152–156. JSTOR, www.jstor.org/stable/593715. Accessed 6 Mar. 2020.
7. Shakespare, William. As You Like It. New York: Washington Square Press/Pocket Books, 1996.
8. Shakespeare, William. The Tragedy of Hamlet, Prince of Denmark. New York: Washtington Square Press, 1992.
9. Singh, Dr. N. K. Encyclopedia Dictionary of Sanskrit Literature. Ed. J. N. Bhattacharya and Nilanjana Sarkar. First Edition, 2004. Vol. 3. Delhi: Global Vision Publishing House, 2004. 5 vols.


Thank you. 

Post a Comment

Previous Post Next Post