WOMEN MAKING POPULAR HOPPERS IN THE FAMOUS MAMANGAM FESTIVAL, BATTICALOA-2010

Photography: Yarlini Yogeswaran

AN EXPONANT ANNAVIYAR OF VILLAVEDDUVAN, BATTICALOA!

Annaviyar prepares!

Young temple painter by profession prepares himself as Annaviyar!
Ambitious young man from Villavedduvan, Batticaloa.

A PLAY FOR CHILDREN

Tuesday, September 1, 2009
S Jeyasankar’s play for children
By K.S. Sivakumaran

(Septmeber 01, Colombo, Sri Laka Guardian) Pillai Alutha Kaneer (Tears shed by the child) is a play written in Thamil by S Jeyasankar senior lecturer in drama and theatre arts, Eastern University. Jeyasankar who engages in theatre and research activities is also a traditional theatre (Koothu) performer. A poet in Thamil and English he writes essays on literary subjects, is a coordinator of Third Eye Local Knowledge and Skill Activists’ Group and Third Eye English Forum, and is the co-editor of the literary journal Third Eye. This journal also comes as Moontravathy Kunn in Thamil.

Jeyasankar who prides himself as a man born in Yaalpaanam is married to a painter of repute, Vasuki.

The book can be obtained from 30, Old Rest House Road, Madaalakalappu at Rs 75/- per copy. Susiman Nirmalavasan has illustrated the inside pages and the cover. The book is dedicated to Meikandan Saravanamuththu the “pioneer theatre artiste who engaged himself with school children and practiced the art of theatre as an educative and entertainment medium.”

The play is based on Paalukku Paalahan (A Baby for Milk) written by one of the most successful playwrights and producers of Thamil plays, Kulanthai M Shanmugalingam which relates the original story of Antonio Gramsci. Jeyasankar’s play is translated into English by S M Felix.

Jeyasankar has this to say in his introduction: “The play tries to depict the importance of self-consciousness of men about their living environment....the modern knowledge system made by men had constructed that the men as the centre of the universe and failed to recognize even the role of women in history.”

The book consists both the Thamil and English versions. Readers who cannot read Thamil can read the English version. Of importance is that this play is written as a drama script for performance.

For instance the opening scene has this direction :

The story

The story of the play is simple. A mouse has drunk the milk meant for a baby, regrets and goes in search of some milk to be given to the crying child. It first asks the goat but the goat says she is all dried out of milk because of the drought. If the mouse could bring her some green grass then she would be able to give the much needed milk for the baby. So the mouse goes to the field to get some grass.

Here again it’s the same story. The field wants water to wet the grass. What can the mouse do now as the child keeps on crying? Its next move is to run to a pond. But there is absolutely no water in the pond as the frog and the stork that flew over the pond endorse. The pond advises the mouse to bring a mason to build a reservoir or something like that.

The mason is approached fast but he again says he has no cement, stones, timber etc to build a bund. The tired mouse gets irritated because the frog and the stork are making noises. The mouse then runs to the mountains to get some stones.

After a long harangue of retelling what had happened so far in pursuit of milk for the baby, the finale comes when all of them get together planting trees and collecting the material that is needed. In the process they succeed in working together to obtain milk from the goat to feed the baby.

The Thamil version is more explanatory than the English version. The dramatic element is aptly incorporated. The dialogue is written in Yaalpaanam speech patterns. I would have liked if the drama had been written in Maddakaalappu speech particularly when it was staged in that city.
-Sri Lanka Guardian

Kooththu Maththalam of Araly, Jaffna,

Photography: S.Jeyasankar

KOOTHTHU PRACTICE : THE TRADITIONAL THEATRE IN THE VILLAGES 2010

Kooththar in practice! Villavedduvan, Batticaloa-2010

Tradition Transmitted!!! Strong Maththlam playing tradition of kooththu in Araly, Jaffna -2010.

Problematic of performing “Parai Aravon” (Drummer) in traditional Theatre.

Parai Arivon with a bottle of tody in traditional kooththu.

From Tradition to Reformulation: A Journey through Participatory
Action Research.
Kooththu is the Traditional Theatre of the Tamils of Sri Lanka. Parai Araivon (Herald) is one of the "interesting" characters in the Kooththu performance. The arrival of the Parai Araivon on to the Kalari (round stage) kindles the spectators and gets them into laughter.

The role of Parai Araivon in Kooththu is to convey the official message (pirasitham) of the court. Basically, Parai Araivon is also a servant of the King and also the citizen of the Kingdom like the Kaddiyankkaran, a dignified character which narrates the arrival of the King to the Court.

But the portrayal of the Parai Araivon is different in treatment from all the other characters of the Kooththu. He is portrayed as a comic element in a negative manner. It's a reflection of caste oppression among the Tamils of Sri Lanka.

It also paved way for conflicts and clashes among the castes of Tamils in Sri Lanka Vies a vie Parior versus other castes who perform Kooththu which contains the element of the traditional portrayal of the Parai Araivon.

The character was reformulated with the participation of Annaviyars and Parai Melam Players as a positive one and developed as a facilitator to run a forum theatre followed by the Kooththu performance.

Kooththar(Traditional Theatre Performers) of Araly, Jaffna

One of the popular Traditional Performers in Jaffna. They still maintain a vibrant Traditional Theatre tradition with powerful dances.

Annaviyar of Kaththavarayan and a still from his Performance!

Annaviyar Arumuham Rasiah

of
Pallasuddi ,Pandateruppu, Jaffna

Children in Kooththu Practice!

Kooththu in Kinnaiyadi, Batticaloa!

Annaviyar and affiliate of Reformulation of Kooththu, Kooththu Performer, Theatre Activist and Researcher T. Gowreeswaran with the 'Sallari'

The young kooththu perrformers in practice!

Kooththu In Mylambhaveli, Batticaloa, Sri Lanka-July2010

"Thasakirivan Thawanilai" Vadamoodi Kooththu. Held on 22nd July,2010 night.

wash drawings of Vasan

The Echo of Moonlight

The Echo of Moonlight



Parampu mountain.

Pari had died,

and the sun had vanished in the darkness.

Ankavai and Cankavai

were refugees.



They had fallen

to the “royal drums beating victory”

and on their hill, on a narrow path

that seemed to be filled with the sorrow

of their downcast moonlike faces

Pari’s daughters walked. Coming down

from the hill, the moonlight itself seemed to walk slowly

to accompany Kapilar, who had grown so old.


As they walked,

growing weary

and weak

whiteness flowed over everything --

the moonlight,

the hair of Kapilar,

Pari’s daughters

and the good life of Parampu.



With reverence Kapilar entrusted

Pari’s daughters whose lives were broken

to Auvai and disappeared.

The journey continued.

Pari’s daughters walked with Auvai

and with all the village

so poor their only food was gruel,

and the moon stood, hesitating, and went with them.



As if her long life

granted by Atiyaman’s nelli fruit

were approaching its end,

Auvai hurried.

Sealing the marriages by pouring water,

she gave Pari’s daughters

to the men who had destroyed their lives on Parampu mountain,

Pari’s daughters who, like her,

made Tamil.

If only she had given them

to the families of men so poor

that, late in giving taxes,

they have only gruel or porridge to pay,

Pari’s soul would have rejoiced.



That day, in the white light of that moon,

there was Parampu mountain,

and the drums beating victory,

and Ankavai and Cankavai

who became slaves in the harem of kings

and cried in pain -- and now

on this day, in the white light of this moon,

their echoes still resound.

Original poetry in Tamil by S. Vilvaratnam
Translated by: George L. Hart

DRIED FISH 2010-CREATIVE WORKS OF VASAN

DRIED FISH 2010- CREATIVE WORKS OF VASAN

sculpturing bodies but NOT minds! works of vasan

:::Annaviar Chelliah::: Little-known man behind well-known Tamil theatre

:::Annaviar Chelliah::: Little-known man behind well-known Tamil theatre
By: Professor Karthigesu Sivathamby

Source: Northeastern Herald

Kathiramalai Chelliah, one of the many unforgettable annavis of the Batticaloa kooththu tradition, passed away in Vantharamoolai last week at the ripe old age of 78. Sri Lankan Tamil theatre will always remember the annaviar as a virtuoso who helped late Professor S. Vithiananthan in the latter?s mission of modernising the kooththu dance form and enabling it to be brought to the Sri Lankan stage as modern Tamil drama. Annaviar Chelliah?s virtues as a trainer?presenter of the Batticaloa kooththu should be remembered gratefully and it is the duty Sri Lankan Tamil theatre historians not to forget to give him his due place.

The story begins in 1956; the year Prof. Ediriweera Sarachandra produced his epoch-making Maname, and openly stated that Maname nadagama is traceable to the Kooththu dance form of the Tamils. He had of course polished it, brought in Greek and Japanese conventions and enriched it with fulsome music, using the violin and sitar. But theatrically it belongs to Kooththu in Tamil that refers to the traditional dramatic presentation, which depicts a narrative through dance. Originally the word must have referred to a group dance (dancing a theme) with and through physical movement.

Traditional temple dances of Tamil Nadu had, over the years, marginalized the kooththu to the streets, so much so that it came to be known in that part of India as theru kooththu (theatre of the street). Nonetheless kooththu in classical Tamil continued to be known as dance / performance, and Lord Siva Himself, in the form of the great cosmic dancer, was called ?Kooththan? and the famous Saivite temple at Chithambaram where He is supposed to have performed the dance was called ?kooththambalam.?

Reduced to the streets, post 18th century theatre developments did not touch the kooththu of the lower strata of society and theru kooththu in Tamil Nadu was retained more or less as ritualistic theatre.

In the Jaffna District, puritanical social reforms brought in by Arumuga Navalar took away entertainment like the kooththu from the lives of the upper and even the middle strata of society, confining it to the depressed castes. In other Tamil areas where Navalar?s ideology did not rule supreme, traditional entertainment forms fared better. The Vanni seems to have had a flourishing kooththu tradition. Of course in Mannar, the enculturation of the Catholic Church was done through kooththu and the genesis of the Sinhala nadagama is, in turn, attributable to Catholic Tamil kooththus.

In Batticaloa, the situation was very different to Jaffna. ?Navalarism? did not gain ground there, nor was the caste heirachy strong. The kooththu tradition was preserved among all castes, from the agrarian caste to the service castes, from the fisher caste to the artisan castes. And as luck would have it the ritualistic character of the theatre was not lost either. Therefore, when Sarathchandra spoke of the kooththu one may only turn towards the Batticaloa District, where the tradition has remained intact.

Vithiananthan began his mission of retrieving and revitalising the kooththu tradition from 1956 onwards, when he was made the chairman of the Tamil Drama Panel of the Arts Council of Ceylon. He was the chairman from 1956 to 1967 and it was the proud privilege of the present writer (who was his student for both undergraduate and postgraduate studies) to work with him as secretary to the panel during that period. In the years 1956 to ?60, Vithinanthan with great perseverance and patience, developed and enabled the emergence of a young group of kooththu performers by nursing their skills and encouraging their enthusiasm from school days.

S. Mounaguru, the staff performer in Vithinanthan?s kooththu productions, was discovered in an inter-school competition in 1959 and that was the first time ever an inter-school kooththu competition was held. When a substantial group of young men arrived at the University of Peradeniya in 1961-62, Vithiananthan could plan in terms of an undergraduate production of the kooththu. Mounaguru, Perinpanayagam, Kanagaratnam and a few others, all competent dancers, were then undergraduates. The search was now on for a really competent annaviar who would understand the needs of a university production, and more than that, its significance.

The word annavi though it refers in common parlance to a traditional drama teacher-instructor is a derivation from the term ?annanthu nokkal? meaning looking upwards. The annaviar (the final ?ar? is an honorific suffix) was originally the man who led the team of dancers and was looked up to as the master. There is a social significance too in that these annaviars were also community leaders held in high esteem by society. Therefore, being an annaviar meant one who was committed to the preservation of the traditional dance form being polluted by extrapolations and novelties arising from individual fancies. Thus, it was essential to identify an annaviar who was not only a master of the art but also a man who could be flexible and be able to legitimise the flexibility. Above all, the would-be trainer had to fit into the halls of Peradeniya. Vithyananthan made the final choice from a list of good number of annaviars. The final choice was just the right one.

Annaviar Chelliah?s task was threefold: train the girls and boys to dance the kooththu, increase the performance capacity of those who already had some experience in the dance form and play the maththalam to bring out the dramatic potential of the ?arttams? (dances).

After much discussion ?Karnan por? (the Battle of Karna), an episode from the Maha Bharatha was decided upon as suitable for performance because of its high dramatic potential. As a play, full of scenes of combat, it was rich from the arttam perspective. The storyline was an intensely tragic one. Karna in the Maha Bharatha was the only warrior who could have won the war for Duriyothana, with his naga (snake) arrows ? ?nagasthram? ? but Lord Krishna creates diffidence in Karna by reminding him about his birth and manoeuvres it in such a way that he cannot use the arrows effectively. The play has great dramatic potential both as spectacle and as human drama.

Vithiananthan had to be careful. He had to make modern theatre out of kooththu, while at the same time not be accused of having hybridised the dance form. His student collaborators were for intensifying the dramatic part. But Vithiananthan did not want to cross the boarder. In retrospection, one sees the production itself was an intensely difficult one. At the time Karnan por was produced, the kooththu tradition was to perform the dances almost as a self-contained entity, while treating the dialogue as only marginally important for the arttam. This led to some serious difficulties: (a) the dance was taken as an end in itself; in fact it received a dominant attention, (b) the song which held the story and/or the conflict was virtually submerged by the dance and (c) the joint orchestration of the singers and the drums did not allow the communication of meaning to the spectators.

To one trained in the culture of kooththu, there was no problem in becoming a ?sahrdaya? (appreciating with oneness of heart) but to one unfamiliar with the idiom the performance merely meant spurts of songs and dances.

We wanted to mediate the songs to the dance steps thus bringing out the emotions clearly. This necessarily meant a slight slowing down in the pace, but it was essential for the ?drama.? It is here the annaviar?s virtuosity comes in.

To realise the importance of the annaviar, one should know his task. He is the trainer, the director, the dance master who controls the pace of the performance, but he is not a man behind the scenes, he is right in the middle of the performance placed usually on a circular stage (Vattakalari). He presents the play, plays the percussion instrument that determines the pace of the play, and by playing the maththalam he is also a performer. In the Vadamodi style, he stands at the centre and enables the unrestrained flow of the drama through his efficient drumming. In the Thenmodi tradition he is also an interlocutor, talking to the characters especially the less important ones. Thus he drums and acts.

Annaviar Chelliah rose up to the occasion marvellously. When he realised the dramatic variations in the story his rich drumming experience began to show itself. It could bring out all the nuances, soft and hard, through his fingers.

Another major concern of ours was to get the performers to ?act? ? to portray their characters. There was a fusion of Brecht and Stanislavsky and along with this was the more crucial part of making the dance steps an integral part of the dramatic exposition. Thus, the dance forms such as veesanam, became steps to help characterization. Thus there would be a difference in the gait of Karnan and Krishna and between Duriyothana and Veeman. An added problem was that girls did the female roles unlike in the traditional kooththu where men played the role of women. Fortunately, most of the female cast had been trained in Bharatha Natiyam. But they were not kooththu material. All this made Annaviar?s task only more difficult. It was not to be the kind of kooththu that we normally see. We were trying to distil the ?genunie? kooththu, which lay buried in the outer spectacle and dance. Chelliah Annaviar had the artistic sensitivity and the creative intelligence to immediately respond to his new challenges. His voice was his also an asset. All these combined to make Karnan or not only epoch making in its presentation but intensely human in the depiction.

A new leaf was turned in the annals of kooththu with the production of Karnan por. It was no doubt, a singular achievement of Vithiananthan?s, but it also that of Chelliah?s. His role as the presenter, made it look natural and easy flowing. The performance did not come across as a first effort, but as that of a polished professional.

Vithyananthan did three more plays with Annaviyar Chelliah ? Nondi Nadagam (1963), Ravanesan (1965) and Valivathai (1967). I was out of the Island in 1967, but had the privilege to be associated with the other two productions.

Ravanesan is a landmark in kooththu revival. The tradition was to do plays that had a written script. Ravanesan was different. We took the fall of Ravana as depicted by Kamban and got it written to suit the arttams the dances in the kooththu. Mounaguru did these transcreations. He made it a kooththu script. Then songs had to be written to the varying rhythms of the different dances. Much efforts went to this. A combination of dance rhythm, literary resonance and dramatic depth were equally essential. Mounaguru put into song what we decided. The Annaviar was not out of it. He too made his contributions.

In Ravanesan there was a blend of the new and old, the traditional and the modern. Such experimentation was possible because we had in Mounaguru a really versatile dancer. He could marry the steps to suit the mood. There were other performers too such as Perinpanathan who as Sallian in Karnan por brought out the intricacies of kooththu dancing in the most vivid manner. It was a sturdy performance that had a certainty and definitiveness of a talented dancer. One should not forget Kanagaratnam either, who was a great dancer. They were once-in-a-life time combination.

The richness was fortified by the assistance give by N. Santhalingam as makeup man and Kamala acca (Vithiananthan?s wife) as the costumer. N. Santhalingam?s makeup differed greatly from the traditional one, which usually looks gaudy and unnatural under electric lights. In one of the later productions Sithamparapillai of Alaveddy, a great folk singer and Udukku drummer was brought in.

It was the undoubted capability of Annaviar to combine such a diversity of inputs that led to performances of great authority and intense drama. However, he never tried to pose as one who knew every thing about kooththu during rehearsals. In fact one could accuse him of having hidden his talents. Off stage he was a very humble man and was not quite happy in his new Peradeniya environment. He enjoyed his drink and liked to have the bottle under his bed. But Vithiananthan in that sense was a hard taskmaster. He wanted Annaviar to enjoy his drink, but not become a drunkard. Understandably, some of us turned out to be quite intimate with him and the degree of intimacy depended on the periodic drink he wanted.

Annaviar Chelliah later became a much talked of artist. Mounaguru and his collaborators used him in their new productions. But Annaviyar was never able to overcome the pangs of poverty. At this point I should extend a word of appreciation to certain younger members of the staff of the Eastern University for helping Annaviar periodically. Had it not been for the generosity of those from the university?s Fine Arts Department, his position would have been much worse. It is a pity that the local Arts Council had not helped him to the extent it could have, and should have. In spite of all this the artist in him was never blunted. His conversation revealed his artistic depth and his integrity. May his soul achieve eternal bliss it fully deserves.

art of imagination- vasan's works with children

art of imagination

Kooththu(Traditional Theatre) in Thattumunai, Vaharai, Sri Lanka

After a long period, the Thattumunai village has started to practice the "Kusalavan" vadamody kooththu(March 2010). I captured some pictures during their practicing time.

Thattumunai is a village located in Koralaipattu North DS division (Vaharai) and affected very vastly by both Tsunami and the War. They have started to practice this kooththu after a long time. This is a significant event in Vaharai that they have committed to perform this kooththu to mobilize their community towards living together.

J.Karunenthira