The Sanskrit Drama in its Origin, Development, Theory & Practice c17.s2.5

c17.s2.5

The play is typical of the later drama; its one merit is Act V where the spectacle of the river goddesses grouped round the ocean affords admirable scope for an effective tableau, but it is wholly out of harmony with dramatic action. As usual, the author is fond of the long metres, though the Vasantatilaka is his favourite; then comes the Cārdūlavikrīḍita, Ҫloka, Ҫikhariṇī, and Sragdharā, while he shows decided fondness for the Svāgatā, which occurs a few times in Rājaçekhara and the Mahānāṭaka, but is not employed in the earlier drama. The drama is superior in merit to the other very popular Rāma drama, the Jānakīpariṇaya¹ by Rāmabhadra Dikṣita, who flourished and wrote many bad works at the end of the seventeenth century. The number of Rāma dramas already known is enormous; any one of merit appears still to be unearthed. The commentary on the Daçarūpa knows a Chalitarāma which would probably date before A.D. 1000, but its preservation is problematical. The Adbhutadarpaṇa² of Mahādeva, son of Kṛṣṇa Sūri, a contemporary of Rāmabhadra Diksita, shows Jayadeva’s influence in that it presents the events at Laṅkā as happening by means of a magic mirror. Its ten acts cover only the period from Aṅgada’s mission to Rāvaṇa to the coronation of Rāma, and it introduces, contrary to the rule in Rāma dramas, the figure of the Viḍūṣaka.