what happens when an ancient Sanskrit performance treatise meets a Greek tragedy

Author's Note:

This essay was written in December 2019 for TDHT 21 with Professor Power-Sotomayor at UC San Diego — one of my first forays into writing critically about performance. I came to the Natyashastra not as an abstraction but as a practitioner: I had trained in Bharatanatyam for years before I ever encountered it as an academic text, which gave this particular assignment a strange doubling — the sensation of reading formal notation for something your body already knows. The essay argues for using the Natyashastra as a critical lens through which to re-examine Sophocles' Oedipus Rex, and to surface interpretations of the play that resist the gravitational pull of Freud. I've left it largely as written — the analysis and the earnestness both intact.

Cross Connections in Theater: The Use of the Natyashastra in Oedipus Rex

In our modern world, we often believe that there is a disconnect between different ancient cultures’ theatrical practices. However, art is one of the few mediums of communication that can be considered almost “universal.” Therefore, if we create theatrical connections, it would enable us to examine performance in new ways. One such example of this is using Bharata’s Natyashastra as a basis for performing Sophocles’ Oedipus Rex. This meeting of the East and the West seems oppositional,  especially since we often regard the Greeks as the “founders” of theater and Asian practices as “ritualistic” and, in crass terms, “dead.” However, this is not the case; by connecting the Natyashastra and Oedipus Rex, we can steer away from generic interpretations of the play. 

Oedipus Rex, the titular work of Sophocles, has long been revered as “the penultimate play” due to its use of plot structure. Though it may not be seen as “relatable” or even appropriate in modern times, it is an important reflection of the Greeks. Their theater relied heavily on plot structure and was expected to evoke catharsis (the release of emotions) in its audiences (Winter). The basic plot of Oedipus Rex is that Oedipus’s parents, King Laius and Queen Jocasta, heard a prophecy that he would grow up to kill his father and wed his mother (Britannica). To prevent this from happening, they crippled the baby and left him to die on a mountain, where he was found by kind farmers. When Oedipus grew up, he heard the prophecy and fled the village to save his “parents”. He later encounters King Laius and kills him over a dispute. Then Oedipus goes to Thebes (his birthplace), saves the city by solving the Sphinx’s riddle, is crowned king, and marries Jocasta (his mother). Since the prophecy --unknowingly-- comes true, Thebes is struck by misfortune and it is prophesied that if the killer of King Laius is found, then the city will be saved. Thus Oedipus Rex’s climax arrives when Oedipus finds out the whole truth about his background, driving him mad. Jocasta hangs herself, and in shame Oedipus blinds himself with her brooch, resolving to become a wanderer in self-imposed exile. 

The plot of Oedipus has been the subject of analysis for many years, and especially in modern times, the Freudian term “Oedipus Complex” is being pushed to the background. In the words of philosopher Jonathan Lear, “we cannot begin to appreciate the meaning of Oedipus if we continue to think that Oedipus was oedipal”(Boxer). Analysts are turning away from the idea that Oedipus Rex revolved around the revelation of the fulfilled prophecy, instead focusing on the other themes and emotions at play, such as “the inevitable perversity of nature” (Boxer). In order to delve deeper into these analyses, we should use other theatrical texts, such as the Natyashastra, as a basis for performance. 

The Natyashastra is an ancient Sanskrit text on the performing arts. The text in itself is layered and complex, with 36 chapters that codify performance (Gerould, Natyashastra). The Natyashastra extends further than just theatrical plays, and also addresses music and dance -- it is commonly used now in classical Indian Dance forms, such as Bharatanatyam and Kathakali. As a treatise on the arts (Natya means “to act” and Shastra means “manual/ treatise”), it has served to influence Indian culture for centuries. One of the most important parts of the Natyashastra is the idea of “Rasa,” or the emotions that an actor portrays that elicit “Bhava” in the audience (and, if performed well, in the actor). In Sanskrit culture, entertainment is not the primary goal -- performers try to use their art to create and transport the audience to a different reality. The text directs performers to use codified costumes and occasional props instead of relying on backdrops and scenery. This makes Sanskrit drama (as well as the arts that have been influenced) a theatrical form that relies on the relationship between the performer and audience, which is a view that differs from not only the Western view, but also from other Eastern practices. 

Because of the dissimilarities in Greek and Sanskrit theater, the Natyashastra can be used to illuminate Oedipus Rex and to draw out other analyses of the play that differ from the generic “Freudian” viewpoint. In order to show the way that Oedipus can be re-analyzed, there are 2 theories that have been brought up in modern times that can be an example of how to synthesize the two theatrical practices. 

The first theory is that if Oedipus had known of and acknowledged his history, he may have felt justified in killing his father. This theory branches off of analyst-philosopher Jonathan Lear’s book “Open Minded: Working Out the Logic of the Soul,” in which it is suggested that Oedipus busied himself with the “royal investigation of Laius' murder to avoid looking his abandonment [by Jocasta and Laius] in the face” (Boxer). The idea that Oedipus would have felt justified given his background can be illuminated in the play’s performance by using Natyashastra's codification. This is because a key part of Greek plays is the chorus, who serve not only as the unofficial narrators but also react to the situation in a very similar way as the audience. Since the use of music is important to the Natyashastra, Oedipus could utilize “soundtracks” to enhance the dramatization. For example, the chorus’s lines follow a lyrical pattern that could be translated into song-- thus lines could be delivered with different emotions by using elements of music like singing in staccato or by changing the volume and pitch. Music would allow the director to emphasize the abandonment/ lack of guilt theory in Oedipus as well as link scenes. For example, in the scenes with Laius’s death, Oedipus’ declaration that he will find the perpetrator, his prophetic revelation, and his confrontation of Jocasta, the same soundtrack can be used in order to highlight the thread, thus giving the audience a hint to further examine those scenes and the way they tie into the whole theme.

A big distinction between Ancient Greece and Sanskrit theater comes from the way that emotions are portrayed. The Ancient Greeks (we believe) used masks to cover their faces, thus relying on their voices and the dramatizations of the chorus. This differs from the Natyashastra, which codifies expressions that require minute details (such as ways for the eyebrows to move). By applying the Natyashastra’s codes, actors in Oedipus Rex could explore a larger range of emotions. Though modern performances of Oedipus Rex may not necessarily use masks, they would still be able to use the different “rasas” to elicit the greek “goal”: catharsis. To look deeper into the idea of the rasas in Oedipus, there are distinct places in the play that can be tailored to extract more emotion. Jocasta’s realization (though it is more like acceptance) of the fact that Oedipus is her son pulls on the terrible and odious rasas, since the situation is horrific and shameful. An actor would be able to use the codified use of gestures and facial expressions to increase the tension, thus capitalizing on the already-high emotion. Basically, the use of Rasas would allow the actors to (hopefully) transport the audience to a different reality, and, to go back to the Greek tradition, cause them to experience catharsis. 

The second theory that could be illuminated is matricide and the power of the patriarchy. Jean-Joseph Goux from Stanford University writes in “Oedipus, Philosopher” that “matricide, not patricide, is at the heart of the heroic myth” (Boxer), and in ''The Castration of Oedipus: Feminism, Psychoanalysis and the Will to Power'' (New York University, 1996),” J. C. Smith and Carla Ferstman argue that “Oedipus' relentless pursuit of answers to life's riddles is typically male” (Boxer). Basically, this theory stems from the way that Oedipus responds to the Sphinx with “man” and kills her -- so the hero is the one who “kills...the female monstrosity” (Boxer). In the Natyashastra, costumes are codified to the most minute of details such as makeup and the colors that should be used. To emphasize this theory, the idea of using a mix of colors for royalty as well as the makeup colors for those who have flaws would be used. Those who “do vile deeds...should not be fair,” and although that seems colorist in our modern perspective, to highlight Oedipus as a villain against women, his makeup could have many elements of the darkness even though as a king he should look regal (Gerould, Natyashastra). 

In the Natyashastra, it states that there are 3 ways of impersonation: fitting, unfitting, and unsuitable. As long as there is no significant age-disparity between the actor and character, then it is suitable for men and women to play opposite-gendered roles; roles are based on the actor’s ability to portray a character. An interesting way to tackle the matricide and anti-feminism of the play would be to cast everyone based on the Natyashastra- we would end up with the possibility of a woman playing Oedipus and a man playing Jocasta. This, although the gender of the actor shouldn’t matter to audiences, would force the audience to think about a reversal of roles. This reversal would bring the sexism and “Sphinx-death” to the forefront, thereby highlighting Carla Ferstman’s theory that Oedipus looks for life’s answers in a “male centric” way. 

Though the Freudian idea of the “Oedipus complex” and the tragedy of fate are powerful themes that have influenced the way that we look not only at Oedipus Rex, but other theatrical performances, we can use texts from other cultures to illuminate new concepts. For example, by using the Natyashastra, we can try and “force” audiences to think about the play being centered around matricide and anti-feminism, or perhaps about the possibility that Oedipus would justify his father’s killing on the basis of his abandonment. Though those are but two analyses that have been suggested by researchers, they prove the fact that theatre is a living art, capable of adaptation and change through the years. Although our interpretations may not be exactly what the playwright intended, by thinking about texts with both their cultural standards and the codifications of another theatrical tradition, we can move beyond stagnation. 

Works Cited:

Boxer, Sarah. “How Oedipus Is Losing His Complex.” The New York Times, The New York Times, 6 Dec. 1997, https://www.nytimes.com/1997/12/06/theater/how-oedipus-is-losing-his-complex.html.

The Editors of Encyclopaedia Britannica. “Oedipus Rex.” Encyclopædia Britannica, Encyclopædia Britannica, Inc., 25 Nov. 2019, https://www.britannica.com/topic/Oedipus-Rex-play-by-Sophocles.

Winter, F. E. “Greek Theatre Production: A Review Article.” Phoenix, 1 July 1965, https://www.jstor.org/stable/1087016?seq=3#metadata_info_tab_contents.

Gerould, Daniel. Theatre / Theory / Theatre: the Major Critical Texts from Aristotle and Zeami to Soyinka and Havel. Applause, 2003.