OBIT: GOODBYE, GIRISH KARNAD
A CERTAIN COURAGE AND QUALITY OF MAGNANIMITY IS DISAPPEARING WITH GIRISH KARNAD’S GENERATION
Much will surely be written about Girish Karnad’s intellectual prowess, his contribution to progressive cinema, qualities as a playwright, personal erudition, nononsense nature, good looks and the myriad other aspects of this fascinating man and it will be written by those far more qualified to assess him than I am, so I will focus on Girish, the person I knew and owed much to.
His name, which I encountered first, evoked a grey bearded, bespectacled professorial image for all us callow drama students. So, it was with a gasp of astonishment that this swarthy thirtysomething, jeans and black kurta-clad dreamboat was greeted when he appeared to participate in a seminar at the drama school. The kindly eyes, straightforward opinions and baritone turned female students into limpid puddles and the boys bilious with envy. Even a perfectly straight hetero male could see what there was to fancy in the man—intellect combined with sex appeal— an unbeatable combination.
None of us, as far as I know, got beyond simply gaping at this magnificent specimen to say much to him. We were too awed by his presence. It did seem fitting, though, that the writer of arguably two of the finest plays ever written in India should look nothing like we imagined an Indian playwright might.
It took a while to start addressing him as ‘Girish’ and only happened when we were co-actors on Nishant (1975); he was ‘Sir’ before and through the troubled times at the Film and Television Institute of India, when he, as director, and I, as a student, clashed over something he saw as a non-issue but I considered crucially important for the institute’s well-being. I still maintain I was right and he, till the end, held that “the strike took place for the silliest of reasons”. All that notwithstanding, it was his clarity of vision in putting personal grouses aside to recommend an actor he liked (me) but considered a potential trouble-maker for a leading part in a film that was likely to be significant, that got my career started and it is something I cannot cease being grateful for.
His own decision to act was, I feel, a misstep, though I can understand his reasons for doing it. Always supportive of any artistic effort, not only by people he knew, he was particular about attending and encouraging the work of the smallest of theatrical companies. Such large-heartedness and ability to put biases aside are things that, something tells me, we’ll see less and less of in the days to come. The quality of magnanimity and the courage to not hide behind words is disappearing with Girish’s generation and poisonous opinions disguised as news are soon all that will remain.
Perhaps the braindead intellectual pygmy who referred to a Rhodes scholar, Sahitya Akademi fellow, Padma Shri, leading playwright of the country, filmmaker, educator and conscientious objector as “the Tiger Zinda Hai actor” needs to ponder what will be said about his own ‘achievements’ and his politics when he goes to meet his maker.
A ‘dreamboat’, a ‘magnificent specimen’, Karnad looked nothing like one imagines an Indian playwright might