The satirist speaks

Think political and social satire and one name pops up instantly - Cho. S. Ramaswamy. He evokes extreme reactions and his opinions have always had a great impact. SREEKUMAR VARMA talks to the multi-faceted personality.

HE HAS been many things to many people. He evokes extreme reactions. He makes no bones about expressing his opinions, and moves easily from one stage to the other. Now it's Cho-time again.

Recently Cho S. Ramaswamy bundled up an aging cast and performed plays he had written nearly 40 years ago. The audience came and lapped them up. He sits today in the office of his journal Tughlaq, and talks about theatre, politics, people and causes.

He wears his trademark olive-green outfit, briefly smokes a pipe, begins our interview in a terribly business-like fashion, reminisces happily and laughs out like a child.

Whose idea was it to resurrect Viveka Fine Arts and return to the stage?

Well, if you want to blame anybody for it, you must blame me first! And then some of the sabhas. Because they've been asking us for some time now.

With the original cast getting on in years, how does it affect the performance in terms of rehearsals, characterisation and audience acceptance?

Well, the response is very good, as good as it was earlier. And we're also getting a new audience, in the sense that people who have not seen these plays, youngsters are now coming. And they're also appreciating it. As far as the performances are concerned, well, we have done these plays so many number of times that it is not very difficult to get into stride again. A certain amount of licence is granted by the audience. When a sixty year-old plays a thirty year-old, the audience has to suspend their disbelief! That they're prepared to do. Because the forte of my plays is the dialogue, I think that carries the play.

Do you feel the original provocations that existed when you wrote and presented the plays still exist now?

Unless the plays are relevant today, how do you think they will be enjoyed? The present society and present-day politicians are keeping my plays relevant! I'm not altering it to suit the present-day conditions.

What do you feel about the audiences then and now?

I don't see any difference. Every punch-line, every laugh-line, every serious line is received as it was earlier.

When you wrote those plays, did you create a story which had a social problem, or did you have a social problem in mind and then create a story around it?

Well - (a rather long pause) Even I have thought about these things. I've not been able to find an answer. Every year I was writing a play. I cannot say whether it was the problem which provoked the idea or whether the idea used the problem. I would mull over an idea for almost two-three months. Then I would take two days. Most of my plays have been written in two days. One play was written in one and a half days! At a stretch I would sit and do it. After that, I would not correct the script but cut portions of it because I'd find I had written a very lengthy play.

But discussions with the rest of the team?

No! That was one point where K. Balachander got angry with me. Because I don't discuss. He was a perfectionist, I'm not a perfectionist!

Today we have fast-track plays, which are essentially a watch-and-forget kind of theatre. I watched your play Mind Is A Monkey when I was in school and it is still fresh in my mind.

(laughing) People have been asking us to perform it again. It was written in 1960 or so.

Those days, you planned to go for a play, sat there and enjoyed yourself, and then you remembered the play almost throughout your life.

People who watched my plays used to discuss them for a long time after the play was over. Even now it happens. I spend about half an hour in the auditorium, people come and discuss. They either agree or disagree with me.

Now it's a totally different culture.

There are plays and plays. There should be variety. One cannot subject them to a grammar and say plays must be like this...

No, I'm not saying that. "Cho" has become a brand name today. So when you put up a play, people will come. But when someone else wants to put up a play with a serious theme.

I didn't become a brand name before my first play!

But the audiences then were different from the ones now.

I do not find a difference - But what is lacking today is variety. If the people are assured that they would see something different in every play, I think they would still go to the theatre. In those days, Balachander's plays were very modern, his presentation, conception - there was extraordinary stage-craft. Manohar did mythological plays with a lot of stage tricks. Sahasranamam's was highly cultured presentations tackling social problems.

Pattu was writing farces for Y.G.P. Family dramas were done by Sunderarajan and Seshadri. And we erupted in the midst of all that! We started doing political and social satires. So the people knew they would see something different. That variety is missing now.

So would this also be a reason why you entered now.

No, I didn't enter to fill any gap at all! (laughs).

But there must have been something which finally brought you.

See, we gave up theatre because we found very little time for it. Everyone was busy attending to his family needs and jobs. Now everyone has retired- we have the time again.

What has it been like, being in a minority of one all along?

I would be very embarrassed if I find myself in a crowd! As long as I'm alone, I'm very happy. (laughter).

Is there anyone else who has done this? An individual speaking out, and being respected at the political level? Not someone talking as a representative of a party or organisation, but an individual who differs and dares to speak out.

Let me think - (But he is unable to come up with a name. There is a long silence).

So there's nobody?

Most of the other people have better things to do!

How far do you agree with your film Mohd. Bin Tughlak that the people are like sheep, and can easily be led, whether in the right or wrong direction?

They are becoming more and more aware. That's what I feel. People themselves maintain order - in spite of various disappointments and deprivations. In every election they do make a very considered choice. They have thrown out parties, and leaders who were thought to be invincible. And all this without the benefit of education, or a medium like TV reaching them. And, in spite of the politicians' efforts to whip up communal and caste differences, most of the time we manage to live in peace. So that comment I made then was an exaggeration then and today also. After all, in a play one has to exaggerate. I exaggerated so much in 1968 that it has become relevant today! (laughs).

I found it funny, because during the movie people were laughing when you said the people are fools.

Because people always think I'm commenting about the others, all except them! (laughs) Once in the theatre, when I said people are fools, one man stood up and objected. "I object!" (he throws his voice). I replied, "I included you too when I said that." Then he was satisfied and sat down! (laughter) He just wanted a clarification perhaps!

Do you think any of the media has given you an opportunity to bring about some change.

No, no, no - I don't think so. Most of the time you're talking to people who're already set in their minds. I don't think you can bring about changes through plays or films.

But through the journal one is able to bring about some change at least in opinions - over a period of time. The play ultimately ends up as an entertainment.

You have given yourself so many different roles. As lawyer, writer, editor, actor, director, politician, social critic and TV personality. They all have one thing in common. You're reaching out to the people in one way or the other. How did you start your career? How did you get the name "Cho"?

"Cho" is a pet name in the family. They used to call me that from my childhood. I started as a lawyer and then joined T.T.K. & Co. as their legal advisor. Because I wanted time for my theatrical activities. You see, as a lawyer I found I had no time for the theatre. The evenings were fully occupied with clients or preparing for the next day's cases. Not that I became a successful lawyer overnight and was flooded with cases. I had to handle my grandfather's cases and my father's cases - they were all lawyers. So I had plenty of work to do. That is why I gave up practice and joined the company as their legal advisor - to have the evenings free.

Which was your first play?

I acted in a play called "Then Mozhiyaal" written by Bhageerathan.

That was under the Viveka Fine Arts banner?

Yes. And when he was in search of a name for my character, I said you use Cho itself. That is how it became popular on the stage. People began thinking I was known by the character's name. But no, my character was known by my name!

After sitting quiet for some time, you have come out in two different ways. Is there a method in the timing? What is your.

What are the two different ways?

Political and theatrical.

Political? What do you mean?

The one people are talking about now. Your meeting with.

Meeting with Jayalalitha? (laughs) I'm not out to do any mischief! (laughs again, then turns serious) We were friends. A distance had developed between us. Maybe that was of my making because I have still to learn to control my short temper. Now both of us thought we should erase the distance. (pause) There is no political significance to it!

How did your political activism come about?

I would say it started with Kamaraj. I fought with him on the stage when he came to preside over one of my plays! That was in '63 or '64. I was sitting by his side and we picked up an argument and he got so annoyed with my comments. It was during that argument that he stood up and started shouting at me. We both forgot there was an audience. I was very young. My one ambition in life then was to give a fitting reply to any remark that came my way! If I did it I was totally satisfied. So I went on talking back. After that we didn't meet. And there were a lot of problems - my father refused admission to me in my house.

The company said unless I went and apologised I cannot enter the office. So many things happened because of that! (laughs) But after some time, writer Savi (Sa. Viswanathan) arranged a meeting between me and Kamaraj in his house. We met for more than three hours. The first question he asked me was how is your insolence (adhikaprasangithanam)? I said it's still the same, sir!

He said, let it remain, don't let it go, that's how it should be! After that we met very frequently. Much later, I was one of the few in the media who objected to the Emergency. That is how my political activism started.

Is there any unfinished business in your life or career that you intend to complete?

I want to do a lot of reading.

What kind of books?

Political biographies. And scriptures. I have read the Ramayana and Mahabharatha, some Upanishads. But I want to do more extensive and in-depth reading.

Send this article to Friends by E-Mail

Section  : Features
Next     : Fluid strokes