Categories
In Memoriam

The Verandah, The Voice Note, and You, Abba

By Mubida Rohman

Dear Abba[1],

Weeks have passed since you left us, and today I write to you with the quiet certainty that love does not vanish when a life ends. Somewhere beyond time and space, words spoken with affection still find their way.

I do not know how such messages travel. Through memory, perhaps. Through silence. Through the small things you left behind, which now seem to carry more meaning than they once did.

Still, I write, trusting that words offered with love are never truly lost.

I had known of you long before I truly knew you.

We had spoken briefly on the phone before my wedding, while planning it and in the days just after. If one were to count the actual days we spent in each other’s presence, they would seem very few. Yet what remains in my heart is not the brevity of those days, but the curious feeling that I had known you for much longer than time would allow.

The heart, perhaps, keeps a different calendar.

Growing up, we are taught to fear our sasurbari (in-laws’ house). And not without reason. Women grow up hearing stories, witnessing them, and carrying the inherited caution of those who came before us — our grandmothers, our mothers, our sisters, and the countless unnamed women whose griefs have travelled silently through generations.

Apprehension becomes a companion. It settles somewhere inside the body, as though the bones themselves remember old warnings.

Be careful.
Do not trust too soon.
Do not expect too much.

And so when I crossed the threshold of your home in Guwahati, I carried that same silent apprehension with me.

When my family left me there, my uncle said softly,

“Amar suwali apunalukok gotalu.”
(We entrust our daughter to your family.)

And you replied, with a certainty that asked for no ceremony,

“Sinta nokoribo, taai etiya amar suwali.”
(Do not worry, she is our daughter now.)

At that moment I did not yet know how deeply you meant those words, or how faithfully you would live by them.

The days after the wedding passed quickly. Guests filled the house and laughter moved from room to room. Conversations, rituals, food, and movement seemed to blur together until everything felt as though it was happening at once.

In the middle of it all, you would appear from time to time. Sometimes to offer a witty remark. Sometimes simply to observe the proceedings with soft amusement. Sometimes to express mild annoyance that I had not yet eaten dinner at the proper hour.

You had apparently told Amma[2] that I must be given dinner before seven in the evening, because that was the time I had always eaten. I had never told you this myself. Zubair had mentioned it in passing. Yet you had taken note of it and remembered it with that careful tenderness that says more than elaborate affection ever can.

Two days after the wedding we sat together on the verandah, soaking in the winter sun before another day of guests began.

I remember saying casually that someday, during long holidays, I would like to return and sit there with you and Amma and listen to all your stories.

You smiled and said,“Aitu tu birat bhal kotha.” (That is a very wonderful idea.)

Something about that moment stayed with me.

Zubair and I then came back to my mother’s place for our reception. We sent you updates on WhatsApp, and you replied promptly. Your replies were never long or dramatic, but they carried a steady warmth. You were always thinking of us and making sure everything was going well.

After the reception, Zubair had to leave. Duty called, as it always does. I stayed back with my mother for a few more days, planning to return soon to my sasurbari and spend some time with you and Amma.

Somewhere in my heart, the urgency to rush back to Germany had softened. Something within me felt that I needed more time there, on that verandah with you, beneath the shade of the pink and white bougainvillea, where light fell in warm golden strips through the leaves and unruly branches. The bottle gourd creeper climbed along with a strong resolve. A few stubborn tendrils seemed determined to encroach our sitting space.

And then there was your small but ingenious arrangement: a bowl tied to a string, which you would lower and pull back up to send money to the beggars who passed by so often. Climbing the stairs had become difficult, but kindness, as always, found its way.

Then came 27 January 2026, the day I landed at Guwahati airport. You insisted on coming to receive me despite your poor health and ailing heart.

The WhatsApp messages we exchanged that day, and the voice note you sent on your way to pick me up, have now become precious fragments of memory.

I listen to that voice note almost every day.

When I was young, I envied children whose fathers arrived on scooters or motorbikes, got down, looked at themselves in the rear-view mirror, combed their hair, and then walked in to attend the parent-teacher meeting. Even when I grew older, and though my mother and uncles often came to receive me at airports and stations with warmth and smiles, my eyes would often drift toward girls who ran to their fathers, shouting Papa or Baba.

There was always some unfulfilled corner in me that looked toward that scene, for I was far too young when my father left us for his heavenly abode.

That day you messaged,“We will reach in 15 minutes, Inshallah. I will ring you when to come out.”

Just as I picked up my luggage and stepped outside, you called.

And there you were, waiting with your walking stick in hand, your clothes neatly ironed, wearing that warm smile on your face. You laughed and said what a lucky coincidence it was that you had arrived at the airport just as I stepped out, so neither of us had to wait long. Perhaps, you added with a smile, we might even escape the parking fee.

That image of you standing there, smiling, will remain in my heart forever.

Without even knowing it, you fulfilled one of the deepest wishes I had carried since childhood.

On the drive home, we talked without a pause. We talked about Satyajit Ray’s work, the Assamese literature you said I must read someday, and about Zubair’s childhood in that affectionate way only a father can.

The days that followed passed quietly.

Every morning after tea we sat together on the verandah. You recited the Quran and then turned to the newspapers. I sat beside you, struggling to pronounce the long words in the Assamese paper, until you gently took it from my hands and passed me The Hindu instead.

We peeled oranges and pomegranates together. We ate your favourite jujubes while butterflies drifted slowly through the winter air.

Those days felt brief while they were happening. Now they feel immeasurably large.

You shared stories of exam anxieties and enduring friendships, of staying out past midnight to shop for a friend’s son’s wedding, and of the night you ran for your life, and of the family during an attack in the aftermath of the Babri Masjid riots.

I learned about the difficulties of your engineering days and your years in the Water Resources Department — supervising drilling sites across Assam and travelling through landscapes where rivers could nourish a village one season and destroy it the next.

Perhaps that is why water held such meaning in your life.

At home you conserved it with almost scientific care.

The water used for washing vegetables watered the plants. The water from the handwashing basin became water for flushing. I became cautious at home, often worrying that I might be wasting water. You would gently reassure me that the water that could be saved would find its way to be saved.

Only after your passing did we begin to understand the full shape of your life, and the extent of all that you had set in motion.

People began arriving at our home from distant towns and villages. Many of them were strangers to us, but not to you.

With them came stories. Stories of Md. Ziaul Islam, of a life we had only seen in parts.

We learnt how you once took a bus after work and stayed with a friend through the night, helping him prepare for a bank examination. The next morning, you boarded another bus and went straight to your office, reporting for duty as though the night had asked nothing of you.

Someone spoke of the vegetable seller you would take to the cancer hospital. Amma fed him liquid food when his body could no longer accept anything else. After he passed away, you travelled to his village and helped build a house for his wife and children, ensuring that his family would not be left without shelter.

The security guard remembered his persistent cough, and how you took him repeatedly to the doctor until his treatment was complete and he recovered from tuberculosis.

We heard from the ones you taught and from their families. We heard from the orphanages you had quietly supported. Slowly we began to understand how many futures you had helped set in motion.

We met your former students who remembered the lessons you gave them after returning home from work. Others spoke of the classes you continued to take even after retirement, long after your body had begun to grow frail.

You expected nothing in return — only one hope that education might help them grow and rescue them, even if slowly, from the economic conditions into which they had been born. You never spoke about these things.

You often said that charity should be given in such a way that the left hand does not know what the right hand has spent. In that belief there was dignity, restraint, and a deep understanding of human pride, of how help must be given without diminishing the person who receives it.

In a world where charity is often displayed and recorded, your way feels rare. We wonder now whether we will ever be able to walk the path you lived. We know we may fall short.

Be our guiding star, so that even in our smaller and imperfect ways, we may follow where your life pointed.

Even while living in the same house, we continued exchanging WhatsApp messages whenever I stepped out. Those messages came to a halt on 4th February 2026, the day we admitted you to the hospital for your surgery.

In the hospital, I saw another side of you: the steadfast fighter determined to recover, someone who, even in pain and exhaustion, worried about the well-being of the people around him. I also saw the child within you, your vulnerability, your stubbornness. your sweetness.

It made me feel as though I was the guardian of that child, not only on hospital documents, but also in my heart.

You let me comb your hair the way I liked. You laughed at my silly jokes even though you were in pain. You drank the tasteless tea I made without complaint.

Sometimes you had to be coaxed to eat. Your stomach resisted, and at the sight of the daliya khichdi [3] and oats your expression would change instantly. Even now, I can still hear your tired voice saying, “Aru nuwarim niki khabo ma.” (I don’t think I can eat anymore, dear.)

You wanted nothing more than to return home. To the verandah, to your chair, to the familiar light.

I think often of how little time we had together. How I wish I had not given in when you kept asking me to book my tickets quickly after your discharge. So many times I wish I could stretch the small timeline we shared and make room for all that could not happen.

Perhaps somewhere in another universe, that version still exists. In that version you sit beneath the bougainvillea on the verandah, surrounded by your family. You recite lines of Ghalib and Gulzar from memory, smiling with the gentle pleasure of remembering something beloved. Beside you lies a small pile of books you had hoped to read after discharge. The Prophet rests in your hands as you continue from where you left off, pausing now and then to marvel at Gibran’s words.

In that other stretch of time, the days are fuller and longer. Mosquitoes circle lazily while I chase them with the electric racket, each spark sounding like a tiny firecracker. You watch, amused, and say again with a smile,

“Waah, iman futise.”

(Wow, such crackings!)

Abba, thank you for letting me into your heart, even if, measured by human calendars, it was only for a few days.

Thank you for answering when I called you Abba, and for replying so often, “O ma…[4]

Thank you for the smiles, for the concern hidden in your messages, for coming to the airport to receive me.

You did not speak of love often. But you practiced it in enduring ways: on duty, by being attentive, remembering small things, living simply and giving quietly.

Love does not always arrive in grand declarations. Sometimes it lives quietly inside habits, inside responsibility, inside the steady rhythm of a life lived with integrity.

Sometimes it lives in the smallest gestures, where the deepest reservoirs are held.

And so your story does not end with your passing.

In many ways, it begins here, in the slow unfolding of all that you were.

The boy who grew up in the shadows of Partition, his childhood shaped by a divided homeland and families torn apart by a line drawn on a map over a lunch break: the boy whose mother wrote down the names of books she longed to read and sent him searching for them through the town of Shillong. And the man he became, a civil engineer who measured rivers, listened to birds, loved books, carried a Yashica camera, and believed that life’s gifts must be shared.

This pause here does not mean an end. One day, all of us return to where we came from — to the interiors of collapsing stars from which we are made.

Until that day, Abba, we will keep finding you in small places — in the sunlight falling across our verandah, in the rustle of the pink and white bougainvillea, in the sweetness of oranges, pomegranate seeds, and jujubes, in the trees and plants you tended for generations beyond your own, in the pages of the books you held.

And sometimes, unexpectedly, in the sharp crackle of a mosquito racket.

For a moment it sounds like a tiny firework, and it almost feels as though you are still sitting nearby, smiling softly and saying,

“Waah, iman futise.”

And if love can survive in voices, gestures, verandahs, books left half-read, and in the habits of those who remain, then perhaps you have not gone very far at all.

Perhaps you are still here, just beyond the reach of our hands, but never beyond the reach of the heart, where winter light falls gently, where butterflies drift slowly, where the conversation has not ended, only moved, perhaps, to a quieter room where we have yet to learn how to listen.

Lovingly yours,


Your newly added daughter,

Mubida

Photo provided by the author

[1] Father

[2] Mother

[3] A porridge made with broken wheat, pulses and vegetables

[4] My dear

Mubida Rohman is a writer, photographer, and intercultural coach from Assam, currently based in Berlin. Her work explores memory, culture, and the intimate textures of everyday life, often weaving personal narratives with a deep sense of place. She writes on her blog Cultureyogi.in

.

PLEASE NOTE: ARTICLES CAN ONLY BE REPRODUCED IN OTHER SITES WITH DUE ACKNOWLEDGEMENT TO BORDERLESS JOURNAL

Click here to access Wild Winds: The Borderless Anthology of Poems

Click here to access the Borderless anthology, Monalisa No Longer Smiles

Categories
Interview

Bridge over Troubled Waters

In Conversation with Sanjay Kumar, the founder of Pandies, a socially responsible theatre group

Some members of Pandies, with Sanjay Kumar sitting in the right hand corner.

Festivals often involve pageantry where people connect, reach out and have fun through performances. These can range from high class shows in halls to entertaining performances in street corners, individual buskers or theatricals at home. Brecht (1898-1956), often taught in universities,  popularised socially responsible epic theatre.  Epic theatre connects the players, imbued with welfarism and a sense of social responsibility, to educate the audience, subsequently encouraged to question and move towards altering their present reality to a more egalitarian one. Add to this students who look for more than just academic growth in universities and a young dynamic professor in the 1980s, and the end result is a volunteered ‘institution’ that has blossomed over three decades into a strangely named group – Pandies.

Sanjay Kumar

Founded in 1987 by Sanjay Kumar, an academic from Delhi University with residencies in Italy and the United States for the welfare of exploited children, the group evolved into a major voice trying to reach out to all strata of society. Kumar evolved a form of theatre to channelise the energy of students towards creating an awareness for the need to grow by helping the less fortunate. He tells us by the way of introduction: “We have been working with twenty slums or bastis in Delhi, have had interactions with a hundred schools and about twenty-five colleges. A minimum of hundred presentations are held each year. The major issue till 2000 was gender-sensitisation. Each year, pandies’ latches on to a different theme. After performing in the proscenium theatre, it takes adaptations of the same to diverse places. The group also works on issues related to environment. The adaptable, flexible, bilingual (at times multi-lingual) scripts are totally ours. The group is constantly exploring, searching for better modes to get its meaning across. Songs, dances, choreographed sequences are all a part of its repertoire. One of the most successful modes is an extremely interactive discussion at the end where the activist even narrates relevant anecdotes to get its audience to talk. The group has evolved a mega network in and around Delhi consisting of women, HIV activists, environmentalists, school and college teachers and students, progressive women from various communities including slums, victims of rape, attempted murder.” His work has reached across to multiple countries, universities (including Harvard) and has found credence among number of hearts across the East and the West.

The most impressive performance I saw was online with young refugees from Afghanistan and migrant workers in slums. They have worked with Non-Governmental Organisations (NGOs)  that work with children, sex workers and women, thus educating and learning from them and exposing them to our, more secure world where the maximum need a young student has, is to score well to get into the right university and for their family and friends to travel, to have freedom of speech and better lives. Perhaps, the best way to comprehend this kind of drama is to let Sanjay Kumar take over and introduce the work they are doing, bridging gaps at multiple levels.

Tell us about the inception of pandies’. How old is the group?

The incipience of the group goes back to college really to the year 1987 when we did the first play from Hansraj (a college under Delhi University), though we registered later in 1993, as we broke away. As I got free from MPhil, I decided to start theatre in the college in a way that steers it clear of the festival circuit of doing 25-30 minutes plays and winning small cash awards at various college fests. The College Drama Society was revived in 1987 and under that banner we did six plays, one each a year on the trot: Lorca’s Blood Wedding (1933), Ngugi’s The Trial of Dedan Kimathi (1974), Strindberg’s The Dream Play (1901), Vicente Lenero’s The Bricklayers (1976), Genet’s The Balcony (1957)and Brecht’s The Caucasian Chalk Circle (1944).  Each was a full-length play of at least 100 minutes.

We were doing plays at a semiprofessional level, all having a run of five to seven days in Delhi’s leading theatre halls. The bookings were being done in the name of the college but from the beginning no money was put forth by the college. The funding was collected by the students from small donations. The group was getting too big for the college. There was a constant targeting from many in the administration and the faculty, accusations of the openly sexual content of the plays, of the insubordinate behaviour of the students, of classes being bunked. And then as the group evolved, there were many students who had graduated but still wanted to be there and as the reputation grew with the choice of plays and quality of production (contemporary reviews read us at par with professional groups), many students from other colleges wanted to join us. Things came to a head with the college administration in 1993. We had already booked at the auditorium in the name of the college and were rehearsing for Macbeth. We decided to launch our own group (the work normally took about six months) and in two months we registered and collected money enough to go under the new banner — Pandies’ theatre.   The relationship with structures of the university remains tricky, there are those among the younger teachers and of course students who love us but the old and orthodox are still a bit wary.

Was this theatre started for the needs of the students/ teachers or to create an interest in academic curriculum?

Yes, at that time the syllabus had a totally first world bias (the bias is still there but less), to get in plays that speak to us. They may be first world, but they critique our oppressor — Brecht,  Rame, Genet.

 What was the gel that bound the group together ? Was it used to satisfy the needs of  the students, teachers or society. Can you elaborate? 

The first thing was the love of theatre. It’s like a bug, and the heady thing about a collectivism trying its own thing, charting paths not done in college before. And then the activism took over and went way beyond the love. We started pandies’ with a view that our world is not the way we want it. We wanted to make it better for more people. Even the plays from 1987 to 1993 were exploring non-canonical theatre. 

The first point of attack was the huge gender bias. We felt we were living in a misogynist, rape friendly society. Series of proscenium plays attacked that. We tied up with the feminist NGO, Shakti Shalini. Our ties go back to 1996, with LGBT movements and women’s movements. Veils had more than hundred shows, theatres, colleges, schools and markets and slums and villages. We were asking for  change in rape laws in the country. She’s MAD took stories from women’s organisations about laws of mental illness being consistently used against women to label them mad to take away their property rights, custody of children and provide a veneer over patriarchal violence. Again a play that sought legislative reform was Danger Zones. It explores what happens when you are lesbian and do not have a big wallet or parents to save you — forced marriages, sale into prostitution. 

Equally important, in fact more so in later years has been the attack on religious bigotry. Gujarat was a breaking point. We had years of series workshops with impoverished youth in slums exposing the rhetoric of  bigotry. We start with the Sikh pogrom of ’85 and go on to dissent against what our society has evolved to under a right wing dispensation, the religious supremacism of our world.

When you work with young boys, drug peddlers and sex workers, aged eight to fourteen, you return home a wreck and in need of therapy. But if you keep that fire alive inside you, you know how to take on the oppressors.

It is about a naked politics. We seek to rouse people from slumber, awaken a critical understanding of the world we live, of the forces that govern us — patriarchy, capitalism and, the tying factor of all oppression — religion.

The need was and remains the need of our times and our ethos.

How did the name evolve? And your group evolve?

It goes back to 1993 and is fully in keeping the with ‘play’ aspect of the group which likes to play with politics with its audience. It emerged from collective decisioning that has been the hallmark of pandies’ functioning. The name is a take ‘off’, ‘away’ from Mangal Pandey and the revolt of 1857. Actually, from the inability of the British to get Indian pronunciations correct. Pandey became Pandy, a hated expletive for the British commanders and continued in their letters even 50 years after the suppression of the revolt. ‘Pandy’ was one who was a part of the British structure, in their employ (Jhansi’s soldiers were not Pandies for instance), earned from them and rose against them. The hatred conveyed by the word was many times higher than in the simple expletives of  traitor or the Hindustani ‘gaddaar.’ While it has a historical solidity, it also has a playful aspect just beneath, for many of the young in the group it was also deliciously close to panties and pondies (slang for pornographic literature), the sexual aspects for which the group was falsely castigated while in college, and what we loved to grin and laugh at.

We broke away in 1993, four teachers and about thirty students. Starting as a proscenium English group with an activist leaning in 1993, by 1996 we had turned totally activist. Starting with about thirty-five members (still the core for each project), the group soon acquired more than hundred members (today it has more than that, people go away and many return, even after a decade or fifteen years, to do that “better thing”).  A strong presence of young, motivated women gave the group a feminist essence. And seeking overtly to make our ethos better, the group stressed a Left Feminist Atheist core as the law of its work from the very beginning. Activism, simply the overt statement that we are not okay with our world the way it is and seek a systemic change and are willing to do our bit as theatre enthusiasts for it.

Our three primary areas of work are : a. Proscenium: The plays are always activist and many of our own scripts and many adapted, some activist plays (Brecht, Rame and other activist scripts including agit prop) in the original; b. Theatre outside proscenium: What is usually called street theatre, nukkad natak, guerrilla theatre, the group has done actually thousands of performances and c. Workshop theatre: Where activist facilitators create plays with communities, staying with them or visiting them regularly — razor’s edge work has been done with young boy sex workers picked from platforms and housed in shelters, in the cannibalised village of Nithari, in women’s shelters, with refugees and in Kashmir.  The process consists of getting ‘stories’ from the margins and creating theatre from them, performed usually by the community members, and at times along with Pandies.

Were you influenced by any theatre/art forms/writers or any external events to evolve your own form?

From the international activist tradition Brecht has been the most solid influence, his mode of showing what is obvious but we refuse to see it. Boal, Franca Rame, Dario Fo. The entire traditions of left swinging realism and alienation. In our own traditions the influence is more subtle, Indian People’s Theatre Association (IPTA) itself and Janam (a  more contemporary people’s theatre group). We also borrow from the political and popular traditions of the subcontinent — Dastaan Goi, Jatra, Tamasha and Nautanki to name a few.

What impacts us most is the politics. Theatre is about critique, it’s about my ability to say ‘no’ and my desire to ask ‘why.’ We look back through history, history that tells us nothing can be permanent, that is record of those who stood and fought tyranny and authoritarianism. Gujarat 2002 was difficult and so was Babri Masjid but so was the emergency of 70s and never forget the anti-Sikh pogrom of the mid 80s at the heart of the country where I live.

Yes, and what is happening today, here and all over the globe cries for activist intervention.

What were the kind of content you started with? I heard you even adopted out of Aruna Chakravarti’s novel (Alo’s World?) to make a play. So, what was the content of your plays? Were you scripting your own lines?

We started with adaptations of plays with explicitly activist content which could be made more activist and imposed on our reality. Ibsen’s Ghosts, inspirations from Simon de Beauvoir, Doris Lessing. And post-1996, we were creating more and more from our own scripts, often containing multiple plays tied with thematic thrusts. And again, in times of repression one reverts to adaptations, of those who stood up to the challenge of their times, specially at the doors of gender, religion and class (the three themes of Pandies).

What we did for Aruna was akin to what we have done for other friends of Pandies, fiction writers, create small dramatic enactments based on parts their novels/short stories to go along with the launch and publicity of their works.

Have you moved away from your earlier models? What is your new model?

From proscenium to (while retaining proscenium) community theatre to (while retaining proscenium and community) workshop theatre that was the trajectory of Pandies before the pandemic struck our world. 

The pandemic thrust us into a new model of cyber theatre. The group meets every Sunday but with Covid and the lockdown, we all went hibernating for a few months, awestruck by what struck us.

And then we started meeting online. It was amazing, we were able to connect with members in US, in Philippines, in UK and in different parts of India. There was the frigidity of the online mode but the ability to converse with so many people in their respective bubbles was just great. We met every Sunday. And started with storytelling for each other. With around thirty people that process took some Sundays. And then we started thinking of doing online plays using zoom. These were live online, no recording and each ending with a question-and-answer session with our audiences.

What was happening around us, the pandemic, and the equally deadly forays of our right-wing rulers made us look for avante garde activist plays from the past. We turned deliberately to the American tradition (important to let it be known that even the most decadent capitalist center has a solid activist theatre tradition) and did one agit prop and one proto-feminist play. Subterfuge was important and it was also important to say that even in the darkest of hours people have stood up to tyranny and fascism. Clifford Odets’ Till the Day I Die (1935), an anti-Nazi play of the agit prop tradition is aimed as much at Hitler as at McCarthy and relevant against all fascist governments. Broadcast simultaneously on Zoom and Facebook, the play got over 7000 hits. Sophie Treadwell’s Machinal (1928) was the second, a proto feminist play it raised issues of mainstream violence and suppression of ‘other’ voices. We were making quite an impact. Our audience was not confined to people from one city but spread internationally as friends all over the world who had wanted to see our plays (we have travelled and performed abroad twice, once in Manchester with an anti-fascist play — Cleansing in 2002 and in New York in 2012 with Offtrack, based on the lives of young boys ‘rescued’ from platforms in India).

We decided to connect with communities that we work with at least in and around Delhi through zoom. And we discovered the horrors for ourselves. While the rich had actually been ‘worried’ over the lockdown, the poor had taken an unfathomable hit. The incidence of domestic violence was at a peak (lockdown, problems getting ‘booze’, little help from cops and NGOs). Our young friends — now in late 20s, with whom we had been performing since 2006 since the Nithari (slum outside Delhi) pogrom had been thrown out of their meagre jobs, belonging to families of migrant labour — had seen it all and refugees from Afghanistan — in a bad state anyways — were really hit. And they were all artists, performers and storytellers par excellence. So, we decided on a storytelling festival where people from these sectors would narrate their stories in the same cyber format. And we asked our audience to put in some money and that was entirely distributed among the participants. The stories that emerged, personal and fiction derived from personal, were simple exhilarating.

What and how many languages do you use and how do you bridge linguistic gaps?

Language is highly political. We set out as an English group but with Macbeth itself some crucial scenes were being rendered in Hindustani (the opening scene and the porter scene). By 1996, as the group was going totally activist, a multi-language form had evolved. We were still keeping a section of English in the proscenium (had to be translated or made easier in the slums and villages shows) but sections of Hindustani and diverse languages of North India are being introduced. A recent example is an adaptation of Manto’s(1912-1955) stories and writings (Saadat Hasan Manto: Pagaleyan da Sardar), about 60 percent in Punjabi and 40 in English with no other language used (Punglish). We do a lot of translation work, including at times on the spot.

Who does your scripting? How do your scripts evolve?

The original scripts are a collective, collated exercise and emerge after months of workshopping on an issue within the group. Most of the Scripts are written by me or my colleagues from Delhi University, Anuradha Marwah and Anand Prakash.

Who are your crew members and how many team members do you have? How many did you start with?

The total number is above 100. Many leave for a while and return from careers and families. It is strictly volunteer group. The group has tried variously models and the one that works and keeps it activist intent intact is the one where we do not pay ourselves for our time. A project involves a total of about thirty people.

What was the reaction of your colleagues when you started Pandies? Did it find acceptance/ support did you receive from among your colleagues, the academics, and the media?

I would like to add that the reactions from colleagues and academia have been interesting and mixed. Pandies is the first and possibly the only story, of a group tracing its origins in college society theatre and move on without a break to establish not just a national but an international reputation. Even as the model evolved from proscenium alone to in-your-face activism, from seeking and getting funding to putting in your own money and/or collecting it from the audience but never compromising on the political content of what you do. It makes people uncomfortable, especially in the early years, say the first decade — “is this theatre at all?” Today it is seen a story, as an experiment that worked  — the sheer survival of the group from 1987 to 2021 and beyond creates a space for admiration. Students spread across this university, over other universities in India and abroad have been the most ardent support system.

The media has been supportive, quite a bit actually. Over the years, the Pandies’ fan club has extended there too. We got some adverse reviews to begin with but more from those from the academia, who were writing in papers and journals, who had problems of simply — I cannot see activist success stories from the university itself.

What has been the impact on the people who are part of the Pandies? What has been the impact on the audience?

When you do political theatre the impact is on all sides of the spectrum. And the best place to measure the success is your own side. The empathy, the killing guilt and the desire to do more manifest in the group members, especially after series of tough workshop theatre evidences the impact.  

I saw your play in an on online forum. What exactly made you move towards what you called cyber theatre?

Basically, the pandemic. But it has been a good experience, sheerly in terms of reach and numbers (the first play had 7000+ hits though we never got near that again, also we were ticketing plays after the first). We always crib about the reach of market theatre and how activist theatre falls by the side. The cyber medium actually gives an international access to live theatre. Think the potential is huge.

How would others access these plays?

Amazingly the reach of the smart phone is huge. When we worked with communities, we did send out signals to make available smart phones for our performers and their local audience but discovered that not much was required. The internet does at times pose problems, even for us, there are technical glitches at times but then we have glitches everywhere. And technology, as young techie at Pandies told me, is to be used and not feared. If the audience can suspend disbelief in theatre, what’s a glitch or two on screen.

The potential far outweighs the hurdles.

You had interesting pieces (or rather pieces) evolving out of slums and migrant workers. You had an interesting take on why slums develop. Can you tell us?

The ignored margins of our world. Metropolitan cities, and I speak of Delhi — my abode specifically, attract people from all over. The prospects are great, and it is not untrue, as we have seen in our experiences of performing in so many slums and more importantly creating theatre with those who live there, that life is actually better for most. They earn more, eat better and find better school and health facilities. The trajectory is both simple and awful, many villages around Delhi become abodes for migrants, first on rent and then ownership. These margins are also the blot for the rich and famous who live around there in big bungalows and condominiums. They berate the residents for being thieves and drug peddlers and use them for a supply of menial help, maids, drivers, and the same kind of drugs. Working with them and creating theatre one realises that the grievances from the other side are worse — of exploitations, profiling and being treated worse than animals.

What was the impact of this piece on migrant workers and the theatre you had with Afghan refugees among your audience? Who are the people that constitute your audience? How do they respond to these plays? Do you have collaborations with more universities or theatre groups?

In the preceding decades Pandies has performed in practical every college in Delhi University besides performing in universities all over including IITs (Indian Institute of Technology), TISS (Tata Institute of  Social Sciences), Jammu, Bangalore and colleges of Rajasthan and Jharkhand. The tie-ups and collaborations are specific project related. Pandies has over the years been very zealous of guarding its artistic and political independence and anything that seeks to compromise that even slightly is not welcome. We have long lasting collaborations with organisations that work in areas we are in — Shakti Shalini (NGO Women’s group), or Saksham in Nithari (NGO running schools for children).

Can you tell us its reach — universities, theatre halls, small screen? How far have you been able to stretch out in thirty years? Tell us about the growth.

Bourgeois theatre rules the world. It’s connected  and money generates more money. pandies’ endeavour has been to connect not just at the university levels, not just at national levels but at international levels, evolve collectives that deal with exploitation and oppression at diverse levels.

We perform and do workshops. The group’s reach has been wide. Going on a narrower, sharper course over the last decade to be able to work with the severely marginalised, those who don’t even come on the space of development of the downtrodden.

The nature of our theatre enables us to connect with the underserved and more than 80 percent of the work does not come on the page of the dominant middle class. Performances and presentations all over the country and many abroad use the pandies’ template, Syrian refugees in Greece (2018), Gypsy communities of Ireland (2013), communities in NYC (2012) and nooks and corners of our own country including the Muslim valley of Kashmir where angels fear to tread.

What are your future plans?

As the world opens up, all varieties of work have started again. Workshops with our underserved margins and a full-length proscenium production are both long overdue.

At the same time the cyber experience has taught us the importance of reach, that those who go physically away don’t have to opt out of working for the group.

So yes, we seek a malleable form, a hybrid that combines stage theatre with all its power and is available online live, and the online form too will merge together to the performance which will be more far reaching and accessible. Given the group’s depth we will get there and soon.

Thank you.

(This is an online interview conducted by Mitali Chakravarty.)

PLEASE NOTE: ARTICLES CAN ONLY BE REPRODUCED IN OTHER SITES WITH DUE ACKNOWLEDGEMENT TO BORDERLESS JOURNAL