The political theatre has already descended on the local stage.
Actors are aplenty, performing their political routines, discarding their usual character traits of aloofness, indifference and condescension and assuming new ones consonant with the prevailing theatrical circumstances and scripts.
But the common traits assumed by all actors are a desire to serve the common people and empathy with their constant struggle to make ends meet. Their vocal delivery, actions and emotional expressions portray a conscience and a troubled mind determined to lift the common man out of the morass of destitution.
Their acting, honed by years of performance experience, is so superb and plausible that the audience is vicariously drawn into their aspirations. Different performing groups offer different theatrical experiences.
A most notable performance is by a group that employs a religious script akin to a morality play. The script embodies religious and divine attributes, emphasising the benefits of the hereafter over the here and now. Such a script has mesmerised its dedicated audience, which revels in the illusion of divinity, compassion and altruism portrayed by the characters playing the lead role of ulul amri (religious leaders).
Its track record consists of a variety of performance genres encompassing comedy, melodrama and tragicomedy in the realistic, surrealistic and absurdist vein. But its forte is farce. Its actors are masters of dramatic reversals in actions and thought processes – friends become foes, foes become friends, what was once kosher is now forbidden, and what was once gospel becomes apocryphal, and vice versa.
They switch from playing the role of antagonist to protagonist and back to antagonist, depending on the theatrical scenario.
Their structure of action is usually convoluted and does not follow a logical cause-and-effect trajectory that propels the action. Instead, it is full of reversals that engender numerous conflicts, with short-term respite but no proper resolutions or denouement, leaving the audience confused about the plausibility of the structure of action and whether it will resolve the major dramatic question. This is characteristic of an absurdist performance, but without clarity of dramatic intent.
In addition, this theatre group also performs the shadow play (wayang kulit), with the Dalang (puppeteer) manipulating the puppets and casting their shadows on the screen while conducting the rhythm and pace of the music. He speaks the lines of all the characters, sings all the arias, chants the mantra and dictates the pace and tempo of the dramatic action.
The same episode is played over and over again, lulling the audience into complacency and drawing them into a world detached from sordid reality, but one that accords reverence to the puppet characters and, especially, the Dalang.
Partnering this religious theatre group is a faction from an established bangsawan company. Its performers rebelled and left to join the religious theatre group. However, over time, it became clear that their acting styles were incompatible, with one emphasising bangsawan plays, albeit slightly different from those of its former company, while the other focused on morality plays skewed towards religious bigotry.
In the end, the religious theatre group ousted its new partner, which is currently out in the cold. Meanwhile, the religious company has recruited actors from its estranged partner who are subservient to its acting and performance style.
Such periodic theatrical fare continues with the performance of another thespian company that has wide-ranging experience in performing traditional theatre such as wayang kulit, makyong and bangsawan, which feature traditional subservience and entitlement.
It has played many dramatic episodes since its inception, from the quest for independence to the modern drama of materialistic greed and the power struggle between Rama and Ravana, as well as the gambling away of the state’s resources, as between the Pandavas and Kauravas of the Mahabharata.
But now it has lost its attraction and is reduced to playing the comic scenes of Pak Dogol and Wak Long of the wayang kulit.
Its earlier performances were captivating, attracting hordes of audience members who were lulled into dramatic fantasy and theatrical illusion and mesmerised by plays relating to courtly subservience, the lords’ opulence and greed, and the courtiers’ servitude, as in traditional bangsawan. But, like bangsawan, the theatrical presentation has become an anachronistic relic of the past.
However, this aged performing group is trying to revive itself after a series of dramatic, tragic reversals perpetrated by its main characters, who took the audience for a ride and pandered to the privileged classes and elites to increase the owners’ coffers instead of those of the performers. At the same time, it misused the Sri Panggung and Orang Muda to pander and perform to the powers that be.
The current premier modern theatre group combines modern Malay drama, Chinese opera, Tamil drama, and the Sumazau and Ngajat dances. This is an inclusive contemporary performance featuring syncretic performance idioms to address the various conflicts within the plot and bring them to a successful resolution.
The nature of its storyline captivates and gives satisfaction to the audience. Nevertheless, it has its downsides, as some of the characters do not deliver quality performances and may, at times, drag the production from serious drama into farce.
But when one surveys the existing theatrical landscape, this current theatre group has all the ingredients to offer a variety of good performances that transcend ethnic and cultural boundaries and schisms, thus attracting a multiracial and multicultural audience, unlike the other theatre groups that play only to dedicated ethnic audiences.
Thus, this theatre group draws a multifarious audience into a dramatic cosmos of synergistic existence.
There are also dormant provincial theatre groups that have been in hibernation, without any significant performances, and are now trying to resurrect their fortunes, as well as emerging theatre groups that are splinters from the main established bangsawan companies and are trying to draw audiences away from the main performance groups.
These new upstart companies have taken over some of the hibernating theatre groups in the hope of awakening their members to support the new set-up. But these companies have either poor or no track records, yet want to be recognised in the mainstream theatrical landscape.
Another annoying element in the theatrical landscape is the refusal of ageing actors whose performance days are over to leave the scene. They insist on performing but have lost their credibility and skill and are bereft of audience support. They are so fixated on being on stage that they are willing to sacrifice common sense, ethics and integrity just to remain in the fading limelight.
However, theatrical illusion and dramatic contortions still permeate the histrionic scene, and the players will continue to engage in the world of make-believe to entice the common people with their chameleon-like character roles, creating illusions and almost believable scenarios.
As Shakespeare says in his play, As You Like It: “All the world’s a stage, And all men and women are players, They have their exits and their entrances, And one man in his time plays many roles.”
The views expressed here are the personal opinion of the writer and do not represent that of Twentytwo13.
