Centre Stage

Naseeruddin Shah explains his obsession with theatre and why movies are not half as good

Q How would you describe Motley’s 30-year journey?

A It has been great fun. There’s no other activity in life which is as pleasurable as working in the theatre. Motley has survived because we, as a group, have all believed in the plays that we have chosen to do. In between, we got a bit ambitious and staged grandiose productions like Androcles and the Lion and Julius Caesar, but we soon realised that was not our cup of tea. So we came back to doing what we considered our forte—the theatre of simplicity.

Q In retrospect, which has been Motley’s most challenging production?

A It would be Julius Caesar. It’s a timeless play. One can still make a direct connect with it. The play mirrors the way our politicians behave in the country and everywhere. It portrays the games which people play, and will continue to, as long as there is politics. Besides, what makes the play even more special is that it was the first time I attempted a full-length Shakespeare production. But it was a backbreaking job. Getting all the actors to speak the Shakespearean language and organising that entire production was hellish. I don’t think I’ll ever do it again.

Q What is your primary concern while directing a play?

A Keeping it simple and clear. There’s always a temptation to clutter up a play with all sorts of unnecessary details. However, over the years, I’ve learnt not to ornament a production and have nothing superfluous on stage.

Q And while acting?

A My primary concern as an actor is to communicate the text. And I make it a point to tell all the actors I work with that ‘your performance is secondary to the text’. If you fail to communicate the text, then you are a bad actor. Of late, Motley has been gravitating towards storytelling, but we still use theatrical devices and music to enhance the text. Something like Dastangoi has nothing at all. It’s a bare stage with two actors and the words. I thought there could be no greater challenge for a theatre actor than to just sit and tell a story, yet hold the audience’s attention.

Q Is there anything called an acting technique at all?

A There are as many techniques as there are actors. There is no one God-given technique. Each person finds his own way to connect with the audience. Yes, there are disciplines of the craft, which every actor must learn. Most important being that you must love your work, to the extent that you must be willing to die if you are unable to do it. That is the kind of madness you need to become an actor!

Q Do you see such burning passion around?

A Oh, yes. I see that a lot in the younger generation. I have immense faith in them. My dad’s generation screwed up big time, my generation were the in-betweeners, and the next generation is the hope, which will take our country far. And I say this about the whole enchilada of politics, of business and of the arts.

Q Is it easy to pursue theatre in our country?

A It’s a hobby which we take very seriously. You have to have a conviction about it. As far as I am concerned, theatre has been a complete joy. Yes, it has its own difficulties, like in any other job. Like digging a ditch and chopping a tree has its own difficulties. Nevertheless, they are stimulating and challenging.

Q Do you find acting in films less challenging then?

A Films are not less challenging, but yes, they are less fun. The actors are always sitting in their air-conditioned cocoons and come out only when their shot is ready. They go back once they are through with their scene. What differentiates theatre from a movie is that everyone’s pulling it all together. In cinema, you tell a story through pictures, in theatre you tell a tale through people. So the futility of having castles, gondolas, streamliners and helicopters is total to my mind. Theatre is not a magic show. The magic remains in the stimulation you provide the audience. Only a living human being can do that on stage. Theatre should concentrate on the essential element, which are the words and the person speaking those words. Unfortunately, since the 19th century, modern theatre, particularly in the West, has been burdened with the pressure of trying to look like a film. Theatre can never do that and it shouldn’t even try.

Q One hears that you are directing a film again.

A (Incredulously) Those are rumours. I’ll never make that mistake again.

Q Does the quality of cinema in recent times have anything to do with your decision?

A (Laughs) What can I answer to a question like that? Recently, I watched Kambakkht Ishq. Need I say more?

Q Yes, what did you think of it?

A (Smirks) Well, it gave Sylvester Stallone employment. Apart from that, it did nothing.

Q Subjectively, how do you react to criticism?

A I don’t take it seriously at all or, for that matter, pay much heed to the praise. I just do what I love the most—I act.

Q How would you describe yourself as an actor?

A I put in a lot of effort in whatever I do, but luckily, all that effort is fun. I consider myself very fortunate that I am an actor. It’s the most fun life that you could ask for.

Q Who has been the deepest influence in your life?

A Geoffrey Kendal. I owe my working life to him. He did more for the development of theatre than any Indian ever did. If I can achieve one-tenth of what he did, I’d consider myself successful.