Mummers’ plays have a long
and rich history which stretches back to the Middle Ages in
Britain, Ireland and other Northern European countries. The
origin of the word “mummer” is not clear; some sources indicate
it stems from the Middle English word “mum” meaning silent,
while others believe it stems from the Greek or possibly Danish
word for “mask.”
Historically, mummers’ plays
were typically comic in nature, and involved the death and
resurrection of one of the main characters. The actors’ faces
were often obscured by masks, or painted red or black. The
Christmas season was the most popular time for “mumming”
followed by All Soul’s Day and Easter.
There have been many
variants of mummers’ plays since the Middle Ages, including a
remarkable contemporary work titled
“The
Mummery Book” written by Adi Da
Samraj,
playwright, artist, and spiritual teacher.
In this eNews we are pleased
to offer a intriguing audio interview with Peter Harvey-Wright,
Australian actor and producer, who is currently working on a production of
“The Mummery Book” in Clearlake, California.
Sacred Theatre
The first performances
of
Peter Brook's production of The Mahabharata
took place in 1985. It was a theatre
version of the ancient Indian epic that he had written in
conjunction with Jean Claude Carriere. The Mahabharata is
fifteen times the length of
The
Bible,
eight times the length of
The Iliad
and Odyssey combined, or more than thirty times the
length of
Paradise Lost.
Brook's theatre production lasted
for nine hours, his TV/film version for six. The production
caused a stir in the worlds of entertainment and academia,
hailed by theatre critics as one of the major productions of the
twentieth century, and predominantly judged a failure by theatre
scholars, especially those from India, who, on the whole, felt
offended by the way Peter Brook treated "their" national
religious epic.
About the Mahabharata
"Considering that there are 150
astronomical references provided about the characters and events
in the Mahabharata in one lakh-odd shlokas, there is little
consensus on what information is worth concentrating on. In
addition, there is reason to believe that our scriptures "grew"
over time, incorporating events of every period. So there is
precious little we can attribute collectively to one age. Many
scholars in fact wonder if all the references to Krishna in the
scriptures refer to one person or whether the Krishna of
Vrindavan and the Krishna of the Mahabharata are two different
people. But then searching for that mythical date wouldn't be
half as engaging if the process weren't so complicated. Any
wonder that even though the gods have destinies, they prefer we
view them through fogged glasses?"
Source:
Smita Mitra
