Play: " Tughlaq"

 Hello readers! 

Here on my blog.  This blog is related to the  play: " Tughlaq" click here  and read this  play 

☆ About Girish Karnad: 

Girish Karnad, (born May 19, 1938, Matheran, Bombay Presidency [now in Maharashtra], Indi died June 10, 2019, Bengaluru, Karnataka), Indian playwright, author, actor, and film director whose movies and plays, written largely in Kannada, explore the present by way of the past.click here  biography of Girish Karnad 

☆ Critical analysis of the " Tughluq "  : 

The first scene opening in front of the Chief Court of Justice in Delhi and showing a crowd of Muslims and Hindus, becomes the microcosm of the contemporary Indian society comprising   mainly these two communities .The opening sentence of the play, “God, what’s this country coming to?”1 picturises the present scenario of India when almost every Indian who  believes in its rich cultural heritage  carries this question in his mind. The feeling of brotherhood and unity that stood its ground in the face of the foreign ruler began to vanish under the regime of their own .The drift of the present   from its cultural past is a matter of concern for everyone. Hence, the question ‘What this country is coming to?’ gathers immense significance. The Old Man’s lament, “I don’t know. I have been alive a long time, seen many sultans, but I never thought I would live to see a thing like this”, (147) becomes   relevant in the present context.  

Tughlaq  used religion for his political profit. The person who does not believe in God made five time prayer compulsory for everyone. His decision reflects the present condition of Indian society. Political party also used cast and religion for their political profit. At this the Old Man rightly comments, “What is the use of it?”

The atmosphere of violence, bloodshed, treachery and corruption spread throughout the action of the play is suggestive of the contemporary Indian socio-political scene..The people of independent India confronted two major problems: poverty and violence caused by the wrong political policies. If Muhammad’s subjects run from Delhi to Daultabad with new hopes, the Indians too had high hopes when they shifted from the British Rule to the self rule.

Game of chess which Girish Karnad first used in his play Yayati is recurrent symbol in this play. Game of Chess symbolizes the alienation and complexity of human relationship. A critic rightly observes, “Chess symbolizes Tughlaq’s game approach to life wherein he regards the other people as pawns to be manipulated for his own advantage”. The symbol of ‘Rose Garden’ is also very interesting. It shows the alienation and introspection of Tughlaq. He is found strolling alone at night in his garden. There is a heap of currency coins symbolizing Tughlaq’s   grave  which he sees with his own eyes. There is also a symbol of fort in the play.  The young guard standing for the new generation of India describes the fort as a   “magnificent thing” which no army could occupy. The fort, like the self of Muhammad and his rule, has “strange and frightening” passages within it. The guard rightly says “if it ever falls it will crumble from inside” (192) that indicates crumbling of the emperor from inside.

If Muhammad is very manipulative, witty, imaginative, secretive and ruthless, Aziz provides his ironic parallel .Like him, from the very beginning Aziz is clear about what he is to do in future (when he reaches his destination). In pursuit of realizing his dream to be rich by hook or crook,   he manipulates the decision of the government giving compensation to those whose land has been confiscated by the state. He is a Muslim but in order to get the compensation he disguises himself as a Brahmin. Thus he punctures the balloon of the king’s welfare policies .If Muhammad is confident that everything will be settled after he reaches Daultabad , Aziz is also confident of his plans. He tells Aazam, “There is money here .We will make a pile by the time we reach Daultabad.”(p.155).If Muhammd has disguised his true self and poses to be a very religious and benevolent king, Azis is disguised as a Brahmin( though he is a Muslim washer man). Ironically, he appears as a Brahmin and ends up as a special messenger to the king. He becomes an instrument in exposing the cruelty and corruption prevalent in Muhammad’s regime when he refuses to help a woman with a dying son in her lap and asking for help for his medical aid. Aziz expects money from her knowing full well that her husband is bed-ridden and she is helpless. Asked by Aaziz why he doesn’t let her go to the doctor, very stoically he says,”It is a waste of money.  I am doing her a favour.” 

☆Critical  idea on  "  Tughluq "

Idealistic LeadershipWhat makes the Sultan‘s character more fascinating is his paradoxical and complex nature. He is portrayed as a dreamer and a man of action, benevolent and cruel, devout and callousBoth Tughlaq and his enemies initially appear to be idealists; yet in the pursuit of the ideal, they perpetuate its opposite. The whole play is structured on these opposites: the ideal and the real.

Religious Tolerance as a Political Strategy

 The Sultan practiced the idea of brother hood, which is an important aspect of human values in Islam, and this in turn annoyed the ecclesiastics because it undermined their political interests. The efforts of the Sultan to bridge the difference between Hindus and Muslims invited anger and displeasure from the Mullahs and Maulavis. To unite them, he abolished the jizya tax and openly declared that both Hindus and Muslims would be treated impartially and would be equal in the eyes of the law. But this made him a suspect both in the eyes of the Hindus and the Muslims.

Thank you...