CFischer+Assignment+1


 * Visible Puppets and Hidden Puppeteers: Indian //Gombeyata// Puppetry. ** By Michael Schuster. __Asian Theatre Journal__. Spring, 2001. 121 pp 59-68.

Across the globe, unique traditions and rituals are still practiced and performed. For as many different cultures that the world possesses, these cultures have many and differing ways of expressing their values and ideas. However, with increased globalization, traditions and rituals are losing prominence in their cultures, and they are forced to either change or fade. The // gombeyata // puppet theatre in Karnataka, South India provides an excellent example of struggling ritual tradition. In 1989, the professional puppeter Michael Schuster journeyed to Karnataka to enter the tutelage of Thimmapachar, the regions renowned puppet master. For ten months he studied the art of //gombeyata// until he became proficient enough to perform himself, but at the end of his article in the __ Asian Theatre Journal __ Dr. Schuster laments the decline in the number of puppet theatre troupes and the recent trend towards folk depictions in // gombeyata //. Michael Schuster’s depiction of //gombeyata// theatre in “Visible Puppets and Hidden Puppeteers” paints a picture of a unique cultural and religious practice that is in need of preservation.

The article begins with an introduction to Dr. Schuster’s teacher, the puppet master Thimmapachar. Thimmapachar stands out in the puppet theatre community by being a “//bhagavata//—a puppet theatre narrator and troupe leader who teaches the text to the puppeteers, delivers narration, drums on the //mrdanga//, and sings to highlight action and emotion” (pg 60). Thimmapachar’s distinction lends credibility to Schuster’s study as he passes his expert knowledge on. As //bhagavata//, Thimmapachar tutors Schuster in the practices and individual aspects of //gombeyata//. He begins his lessons on an auspicious day, describes the intricate preparation of the puppets, and shows Schuster the formulaic movements and dialogue of the puppets. Schuster describes the puppets in detail to paint an image for his reader. However, he only references one play and never reaches a conclusion in his lessons with Thimmapachar. While Thimmapachar is a narrator in //gombeyata//, Schuster never gives his teacher a voice in the article and turns him into a background character.

While Schuster does not delve into the performance of //gombeyata//, his description of the puppets and their significance to the community forms a large part of the article. He discusses key religious aspects found inside the theater such as the idea of //darshan—//“seeing and being seen by the divine” (pg 64). The aspects of religion intertwined in puppet theatre allow the performance of //gombeyata// to become a ritual in religious practice. Schuster, however, differentiates ritual performance with trance performance. //Gombeyata// puppeteers feel the gods their puppets depict “come to life” through them, but they are not a “vehicle through which ritual action is effected” (pg 63-64). This distinction between ritual and trance performance is integral in understand many of the genres of Indian theater. Sadly, Schuster does not compare //gombeyata// theatre with other Indian dramas. He casually mentions shadow theatre in Kerala, but doesn’t give the genre a name and only compares the performance in it’s long length. The elaborate costumes and dances of the puppets in //gombeyata// resemble the human actors in //Kuttiyatam// and //Kathakali//. An allusion to these genres of performance would have enhanced the description and cultural importance of //gombeyata// in Schuster’s article.

Although the __Asian Theatre Journal__ published Michael Schuster’s article “Visible Puppets and Hidden Puppeteers,” the article only gives a very basic outline for //gombeyata// theatre. For improvement, Michael Schuster should further study under the puppet master Thimmapachar and give more examples of //gombeyata// performance. Schuster’s examination of the cultural importance of puppet theatre educates an inexperienced audience, but the article would better fit an anthropology publication than a theatre journal. South India has many genres of performance. While each is unique, the similarities and differences between the genres explain culture and religious devotion better than a single genre on its own. “Visible Puppets and Hidden Puppeteers” spotlights //gombeyata//, but Michael Schuster leaves the reader wondering where puppet theatre fits in the larger context of Indian ritual performance.