Aram Nagar is a surprising place. For the uninitiated or people from the south part of the city, it is a settlement in Versova of little houses numbered in an unscientific way; thereby making it virtually impossible to find the requisite house. It is slowly becoming Bombay’s answer to Dehi’s Hauz Khas; but the Hauz Khas of ten years ago, when it had artists not boutiques living there.
Aram Nagar is considered the beating heart of the film and tv industry in India. Many casting directors and productions houses have their offices there. The larger places even have rehearsal/audition rooms and dance studios. Theatrewallahs have always viewed the settlement with envy, eyeing the performance possibilities in the old buildings that is, until recently.
In the last few weeks I have been to two enriching Aram Nagar arts experiences both by Tram Theatre, who are dedicated to a form called Object Theatre. The first was the Museum of Ordinary Objects, an interactive exhibition where seemingly mundane items were displayed. However with each item came with a story/ poem that suddenly increased the appreciation for the object. A rubber ball, or a stone became a work of art because of the story gave it context and meaning. What was most fascinating was that we could take some of the objects away with us, as long as we replaced it with another item and an accompanying story. The performance happened at Harkat Studios, a collective of film makers who share office space in the day, and give out their downstairs for arts projects. It made sense that Tram’s project was housed there. The nature of form is that it is often quite an intimate experience for a small audience group.
Last week, I jumped at the invite to the final presentation of Tram’s Do It For Yourself Object Theatre Workshop. I once again wandered the winding roads of Aram Nagar and found myself in a room full of fellow theatre-wallahs for a sharing on many levels. The two presentations of the workshop were a sharing of the participants work from their three weeks with object theatre. There was also the mandatory sharing from the audience of their opinions of the works. But was what most revelatory was the sharing that Choiti did, where she confessed that she was still struggling with the grammar of Object Theatre and trying to define what it is. This was an artist laying her insecurities bare and asked for open and frank discussion – something not usually done in arts practice.
Object Theatre in its simplest form is an actor using objects to tell a story. These objects could be a tin box or a bowl of fruit or anything. The conversation that followed Choiti’s confession, went into whether we need to personify objects in order for an audience to understand, or do we use the object’s functionality (for example a bottle is designed to carry water), or do we use the shape of the object to inform our story and playing. There were also strong ideas around whether a performer should be ‘present’ in the performance, or let the objects do more of the story telling.
The actual performance was only 25 minutes but the discussion went on for over an hour as everyone wrestled with their own interpretation of the form. As with all good discussions, no conclusion was actually reached; rather we were all enriched by looking at the same thing from different points of view. And since we did it vehemently, clearly that was a measure of how much we care: for the form, the artists, the theatre and even Choiti.
