Different types of ancient dramas
The Greek drama was not an isolated phenomenon. Around the same time, in eastern civilisations , drama evolved also, but slightly different.
While the Greek drama was linear and narrative, with a technological intervention to organize the plot, the eastern dramas were designed as an instrument for experience, not knowledge creation.
The eastern theatrical drama is organized differently. The Sanskrit drama is not classified as tragedy, comedy or melodrama, and doesn't have a particular interest in articulating the persona's or discussing philosophical issues. The Sanskrit dramas are organized as 9 primary states and aim to organize these states to bring the observer to a state of harmony.
The 9 states (rasas): Romance, laughter, fury, Compassion, Disgust, Horror, Heroism, Wonder and tranquillity were incorporated in the drama, but with caution to avoid conflicting ones.
While the Sanskrit drama is usually built around a central story. Its can incorporate additional stories, the dialogue is a leading format of information exchange. The actor in the Sanskrit theatre had to master 4 practices: motion and gestures, speech and singing, customers and makeup, and psychological insights. As the Sanskrit drama grew, acting became a masterpiece of performance patterns, creating a sophisticated code comprised of 13 head movements, 36 eye movements, 7 eyebrow movements, 6 cheeks movements, 6 nose movements, 9 neck movements 5 chest movements 24 movements for each hand, and 36 movements for the legs. These patterns were introduced according to the situation, state, and figure characteristics. For psychological identification, the hero could have been one of four types: quite, chivalry, hot-tempered, or sublime. These character types evolved into different figures, each identified by makeup and clothing and to complete the taxonomy, 9 emotional groups expressed mixed feelings: peace, wonder, reluctance, fear, stamina, anger, pathos,, and love.
Different from the Greek drama, the ancient Sanskrit drama was less an instrument for knowledge creation but rather an elaborated tool for creating experiences.
Perhaps its the structure of the eastern drama and its original positioning that determined the way both (eastern and western) dramas evolved. While the western drama format of conflict and social guidance was exploited through history. The Romans harnessed drama to their bread and circuses (or bread and games) strategy. Removing the moral conflicts from the drama and focusing on drama as entertainment. Religious institutes utilized both entertaining dramas as a mean of capturing attention and recruited the moral drama to advocate specific narratives for introducing the public perception throughout the middle ages.
At the same time the western drama experienced its decline, the eastern drama, perhaps because of its established practical patterns or its primary role as an instrument for experience instead of governance and education grew as a craft and oriented towards mastering performance skills, such as acrobatics, dance, and fashion.
Only in the late 19th century will the two meet. But still, these two types of dramas are still not integrated till this day.
The history of drama exposes different characteristics of drama as social engagement and practice.
From a mean of communication and instrument for social alignment to an exploration of the craft of being. The drama, as a fundamental human practice, is highly essential for tasks of social communication, collaboration and for individual expansion of gestures and expression.
Comments