Grey Zones: Performances, perspectives, and possibilities ...

Univers

ity of

Cap

e Tow

n

GreyZones:Performances,Perspectives,andPossibilitiesinKashmir

Nandita Dinesh

ThesispresentedforTheDegreeofDoctorofPhilosophy

DepartmentofDramaUniversityofCapeTown

SouthAfrica

SupervisedbyDrVeronicaBaxter&DrAriSitas

July2015

The copyright of this thesis vests in the author. No quotation from it or information derived from it is to be published without full acknowledgement of the source. The thesis is to be used for private study or non-commercial research purposes only.

Published by the University of Cape Town (UCT) in terms of the non-exclusive license granted to UCT by the author.

Univers

ity of

Cap

e Tow

n

i

PLAGIARISMDECLARATION

I,NanditaDinesh,herebydeclarethattheworkonwhichthisthesisisbasedismyoriginal

work(exceptwhereacknowledgementsindicateotherwise)andthatneitherthewholework

noranypartofithasbeen,isbeing,oristobesubmittedforanotherdegreeinthisorany

otheruniversity. IauthorisetheUniversitytoreproduceforthepurposeofresearcheither

thewholeoranyportionofthecontentsinanymannerwhatsoever.

Signature: Date:1st December 2015

ii

ABSTRACT

This doctoral project investigates the use of theatre practice to engage across the

‘victim’/‘perpetrator’binaryintheKashmirvalley;abinarythatisframedinthisprojectasa

tripartitedivisionbetweenCivilSociety,Militants/Ex-Militants,andtheIndianArmedForces.

UsingPrimoLevi’s(1988)conceptof“greyzones”toinvestigatehownarrativesfromthese

spacesmightbegiventheatricalform,thisthesisutilisedsixconceptstoframetheaesthetic,

pedagogic, and ethical principles of a practice-based-research undertaking: Immersive

Theatre, Documentary Theatre, devised theatre workshops, affect, situational ethics, and

performanceauto-ethnography.

With one Kashmiri theatre company operating as my central collaborator, the first two

phasesconsistedofdevisedtheatreworkshopsandperformanceswithCivilSocietyandEx-

Militants in Kashmir. Exploring instances from these projects through thick description,

critical analyses, and auto-ethnographicwriting, the grey zonesof Civil Society in Kashmir

are situated as being within acts of aggression that occur between civilians who are

differentlyprivileged,whileitisEx-militantswhoarediscoveredasoccupyingaliminalspace

when studying narratives of militancy in the region. By contrasting these two phases of

practice-basedresearchwiththethirdphaseof‘failed’attemptstoengagewiththeIndian

Armed Forces, this thesis postulates that the grey zones within the experience of

government soldiers might only be accessed by making theatre with cadets at military

academies.Bydrawingouttheparallelsanddisjuncturesbetweenthemanifestationsofthe

threephasesoftheatrepractice,thisprojectoffersoutcomesthatcontributetoscholarship

aroundtheatricalinterventionsintimesandplacesofwar.

Theconcludingoutcomesareframedbyonequestion:ifanoutsidetheatremakerwereto

createoneperformancepiecethatcontainscross-communitynarrativesfromKashmir,what

ethical, pedagogical, and aesthetic considerations might arise as a result. Amongst the

strategiesthatareputforwardtoanswerthisquestion,therearethreeoutcomesthatare

particularly significant:a re-articulationofgrey zonesasexistingbothbetweenandwithin

each of the three groups; the proposal of a process-based spectatorship when utilising

novelty in form and content; a re-framing of the discussion around affect and effect by

consideringartists’intentionandspectators’responsevis-à-visatheatricalcreation.

iii

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

ToVeronica,Forcoffee,conversations,guidance,andinspiration.

TotheEnsembleKashmirTheatreAkademi(EKTA),ForbeingmyhomeinKashmir.

ToDoug,Mypillar.

TothelateSriP.V.Nair,Thisoneisforyou,Apoopa.

iv

TableofContents

Introduction.............................................................................................................................1Rationale...............................................................................................................................2Researchproblem1:Settinguptheworkshops...............................................................7Researchproblem2:Executingtheworkshops................................................................7Researchproblem3:Creatingoneperformance..............................................................7

AnOverviewofTheatreinTimes/PlacesofWar..................................................................8AnOverviewofKashmir.....................................................................................................18

ChapterOne:ConceptualFramework...................................................................................24TheMethodology................................................................................................................25TheSixConcepts:AConversation...................................................................................26

ChapterTwo:Cages&CivilSociety.......................................................................................40Performances&KashmiriCivilSociety...............................................................................41Workshops1&2:Initialexplorations.............................................................................51Workshop3:EKTA..........................................................................................................55

Ethics,Aesthetics,Pedagogy&theActors..........................................................................55Ethics,Aesthetics,Pedagogy&theSpectator-participant..................................................64Ethics,Aesthetics,Pedagogy&theFacilitator-director......................................................72Outcomes............................................................................................................................73

ChapterThree:Stories,Words,&Ex/Militants.....................................................................78MeriKahaniMeriZabani,MyStoryMyWords...................................................................87Ethics,Aesthetics,Pedagogy&theInterviews...................................................................88Ethics,Aesthetics,Pedagogy&theWorkshops..................................................................96Ethics,Aesthetics,Pedagogy&thePerformances...........................................................106Outcomes..........................................................................................................................114

ChapterFour:Waiting…&theArmedForces.....................................................................118TheImageoftheSoldier...................................................................................................119TheSilenceoftheSoldier.................................................................................................131TheMakingoftheSoldier.................................................................................................134Outcomes..........................................................................................................................147

Conclusions...........................................................................................................................152Forthecollaborators:EKTA,theinterviewees,andtheresearcher.................................153Forthespectators............................................................................................................158

Consideration1:Balance.............................................................................................158Consideration2:DramaticStrategies..........................................................................161Consideration3:TargetAudience................................................................................163Consideration4:Affect................................................................................................168

Bibliography.........................................................................................................................175

1

INTRODUCTION

The intentions, potential, and limitations of applying theatre in times and places of war

mightbestbeencapsulatedbyJamesThompsonandRichardSchechner’s(2004)writingon

‘Whysocialtheatre?’Underscoringtheideathatthiskindoftheatreseekstohaveapurpose

beyondanaestheticculmination,ThompsonandSchechnerhighlightthemalleabilityofthe

term Social Theatre – that when theatre is put to use in less conventional contexts with

specifically designed objectives, an interdisciplinarity emerges. For instance, theatre that

targetsschool-goingstudentstendstoborrowfromthefieldofEducation;theatreprojects

that address issues surrounding HIV/AIDS draw from scholarship in the realm of Public

Health; theatre that seeks to develop community activism intersects with concepts from

DevelopmentEconomics.Given theSocial Theatrebasisof thisdoctoralproject therefore,

interdisciplinaritylaysatitscore:aninterdisciplinaritythatiswovenaroundusingtheatreas

a practice-based methodology. It draws from Performance Studies, Anthropology, and

Philosophy to investigate the aesthetic, pedagogical, and ethical strategies that a theatre

practitioner might employ when devising workshops and performances between Civil

Society,governmentArmedForces,andMilitants/Ex-militantsinKashmir.1Thisintroductory

chapter will begin by putting forward the rationale behind this doctoral undertaking,

followedbyaliteraturereviewoftheatreintimes/placesofwar.Movingonsubsequentlyto

adiscussionabouttheKashmiricontext,thechapterculminateswiththearticulationofthis

doctoralproject’sdesign.Theconceptualframework,thepracticeundertakenwitheachof

three community groups in Kashmir (Civil Society, Militants/Ex-militants, and the Indian

government’sArmedForces) formsthecontentof thechapters that follow, leadingtothe

lastchapter thatputs forwardtheconclusions thathaveemergedasa resultof thiswork.

Ultimately,thisdoctoralproject’scontributiontonewknowledgeliesinitsarticulationand

exploration of theatre as an aesthetic, pedagogic, and ethically informed practice that

nuancesthespacesbetween‘victim’and‘perpetrator’inKashmir.

1InthisthesiswhenthecategoriesofCivilSociety,Militants/Ex-militants,andArmedForcesareusedtorefertoalargegroupofpeople,thetermsarecapitalised.However,whenreferringtospecific individualswhocomprisethesegroupsi.e.,civilians,fighters,soldiers,thelowercasehasbeenutilised.2 I particularly mention the Indian government here since the Pakistani government’s involvement withMilitant/Ex-militant groups in

2

Rationale

Inatruewarstory,ifthere’samoralatall,it’slikethethreadthatmakesthecloth.Youcan’tteaseitout.Youcan’textractthemeaningwithoutunravellingthedeepermeaning.Andintheend,really,there’snothingmuchtosayaboutatruewarstory,exceptmaybe‘Oh’(Balfour,2012:35).

Myworkwiththeatreintimesandplacesofwarbeganmorethantenyearsago,innorthern

Uganda. Since then, as my research and practice have evolved, my theatre-based

interventions in conflictandpost-conflict zoneshave takenplace inanumberofdifferent

capacities:asastudent,researcher,workshopfacilitator,director,andwriter.Whilemyfirst

few years of theatre-in-war research were framed by being a complete outsider to the

contextsinwhichIintervened,thestrugglesandethicalimplicationsthatcamefrombeingin

thatpositionledtomyreturntoIndiain2008.Oncethere,givenmyintentiontocontinue

myworkinconflictzones,itwasperhapsonlynaturalthatayearlater–in2009--Imademy

firsttriptotheregionofJammuandKashmir(amoredetailedoverviewoftheconflictinJ&K

isprovidedlateroninthisintroductorychapter).MyfirstvisitstoJ&Ktookplacebeforethe

doctoralprojectcommencedin2013anditwaspreciselybecauseofthesepriorvisits,that

thisprojectwasconceptualised.MyinitialvisitstoKashmirin2009,andlaterin2012,ledto

the observation of a three-pronged division that consistently emerged in narratives

surroundingtheconflictsintheregion;adivisionthatseparatesJ&Kintothreegroupsthat

aredefinedbylargerperceptionsof‘victimhood’and‘perpetration’:

Civil Society:anumbrella termthat isused toencompass thosewhowere/are ‘victims’of

violencebutareunlikelytohaveusedviolencethemselves

Militants/Ex-militants: individualswhouse/have used violence as a strategy and are/were

not(explicitly,atleast)supportedbytheIndiangovernment2

Armed Forces: Indian government soldiers who are stationed in the Indian-Administered

area of J&K and are generally perceived as being ‘perpetrators’ of various human rights

violationsagainstciviliansand(suspected)Militants/Ex-militants

2 I particularly mention the Indian government here since the Pakistani government’s involvement withMilitant/Ex-militant groups inKashmirisanentirelydifferentareaofstudy.Inthisvein,IclarifyatvariouspointsinthisthesisthatwhenIusethetermArmedForces,IrefertoIndiangovernmenttroops.WhilePakistaniArmedForcesarealsoapresenceinpartsofKashmir,thisprojectdoesnotinanywayseektoconflatethenarratives/perceptionsofthesetwogovernmenttroops.ThescopeofthisresearchislimitedtotheIndiandimensionsoftheconflictsinKashmir.

3

The more I read about and worked in J&K, the more deeply entrenched I found this

triangularconstellationtobe;aprovocationthatledtomyrealizationthatallmypriorwork

inconflictzones--infactthatmosttheatreworkinconflict/post-conflictzonesasshownin

the Literature Review that follows -- is centred around working with those who are

considered‘victims’ofviolence.

Inamajorityoftheatre-in-warprojectsrepresentedinacademicscholarship,the‘victim’is

considered as “the recipient of undeserved harm” and thus amenable to/deserving of

theatrical interventions; while ‘perpetrators’ are considered to be individuals/groups that

are“evaluatedasdeliberatelyinflictingharmorhurtonanotherorassistinginthatharmful

deed” (Foster,Haupt&DeBeer, 2005:63) and thus, as falling outside the scopeof Social

Theatreefforts.However as anyonewhohas spent significant amountsof time in conflict

zonesmight realise quite quickly, a clear distinction between ‘victim’ and ‘perpetrator’ is

extremely hard to sustain; especially as an outsider. To an outsiderwho has no personal

stake in/affiliation to the conflict in question, victimhood and perpetration are often two

points on a spectrum; a spectrum on which individuals align themselves/find themselves

aligned at different points at different times. While it would be simplistic to say that

everyoneinacontextofwarisboth‘victim’and‘perpetrator’,whatmightbesaidisthatthe

binarybetweenthetwonotionsthathavecometodefinewar(ofvictimandperpetrator)is

insufficienttocapturethemanyidentitybasedaffiliationsthatcompriseone’spositioningas

arecipient/inflictorofviolenceduringatimeandplaceofwar.

This zonebetween ‘victims’ and ‘perpetrators’might be viewed through the lens ofwhat

Primo Levi (Levi inAgamben, 1999:21) puts forward as the “gray zone”, a space inwhich

“the long chain of conjunction between victim and executioner comes loose, where the

oppressedbecomesoppressorand theexecutioner in turnappearsasvictim”.Themore I

encounteredthetripartitegroupinginKashmirtherefore,themoreIbegantowonderabout

howtheideaofgreyzonesmightapplytonotionsofvictimhoodandperpetrationinJ&K.It

is important to clarify here that this thesis doesnot seek to apply “grey zones” strictly in

Levi’s terms. Instead, Levi’s proposition functions as a point of departure to encapsulate

spaces that are nebulous, unclear, and not black or white. Where “grey zones” refers

specifically to Levi’suseof the term, it is soacknowledged;however, in amajorityof the

instancesofitsusageinthiswriting,thetermindicatestheauthor’sapproachtothiszoneas

4

an inbetweenspace;aspacethat isdefinedbyuncertainty. Inthisvein,by“startingfrom

thisuncertainterrainandfromthisopaquezoneofindistinction”(Hughes,2007:5)between

‘victim’ and ‘perpetrator’, this thesis askswhat these grey zones are in Kashmir and how

theatremightfacilitateanexplorationofthem.

Atheatricalexplorationofthegreyzonesbetweenvictimhoodandperpetrationinanactive

conflict zone like Kashmir immediately becomes intertwined with the identity politics

embodiedbytheresearcher/practitioner:hercontextandthemannerinwhichshepositions

herself with regards to the conflicts. My pre-doctoral work in Kashmir revealed that any

manner of cross-community interaction between Civil Society, Militants/Ex-militants, and

theArmedForces inJ&Kisnear impossiblefortheregion’s localstoundertakebecauseof

the ‘gazes’ that many Kashmiris (I learned in interviews and conversations) perceive

themselvestobeatthereceivingendof:thegazeoftheIndiangovernment,thegazeofthe

Pakistanigovernment, thegazeofMilitants,andthegazeofCivilSociety.Beingsubject to

varying kinds and degrees of, what might be called, ‘surveillance’ coalesces with each

Kashmiri’spersonalaffiliationstotheregion’sconflicts;creatinganamalgamationofcauses

that makes cross-community work between ‘victim’ and ‘perpetrator’ groups extremely

dangerous for local artists to undertake. Outsider theatre practitioners therefore, while

subjecttootherkindsofrisks,findthemselvespresentedwithavenuesforcross-community

work thatmightnotbeavailable forKashmiri creators.As JamesThompson (2003:20)has

pointedout, “Oneofapplied theatre’s strengths is in its statusas theoutsider, thevisitor

and the guest”; a statement that finds substantiation in what Frederique Lecomte (in

Balfour,HughesandThompson,2009:185)saysaboutherpositioningasanoutsidertheatre

makerinBurundi,workingacross‘victim’and‘perpetrator’groups:

InBurundi,Iamnotengagedintheconflictatall,thusitiscomplicated.Therebelstoldme,'Itisbecauseyouarewhiteandbecauseyouareawomanthatyoucandowhatyouaredoingnowbecause itwouldbe impossible foraBurundian,aHutuoraTutsi todothis,especiallyinthisperiod.'...TheproblemisthatitisapitythatitisnotpossibleforaBurundiantomakethiskindofshowbuttheycandoanother...perhapsadidacticplayorasensitizationplay.Myplayisaskingquestions,listening[to]everypartofthesociety...InonewayitisbecauseIamawomanandbecauseIamwhitethatIcandothatbutinanotherwayit'snot,it'sbecauseIamanartist,usingtheatreasatool[…].

Bybuildingonthestrengthsofbeinganoutsidertherefore,thisdoctoralprojectattemptsto

exploreKashmir’sgreyzonesinconversationwithwhatCarolynNordstrom(2004)callsthe

5

“shadowsofwar”i.e.,theplacesthataredeemedinaccessible,unworthyofbeingaccessed,

andrelegated to themargins.Definingplacebywhat is “non-place”,Nordstrom(2004:37)

furthersherideaofthe“shadowsofwar”byarticulatingthesenon-placesas“theelsewhere

that is populated by shadowy figures in dark coats: the realms constructed in popular

thought as theprovinceofmisery anddanger… thehomeless, the criminal, the illicit, the

marginal”.Thisprojectattempts tostep intosomeof theshadowynon-placesofKashmir,

then,beginswithanacknowledgement that “in thedramaticarenaofviolence” thereare

multiple positions “such as facilitators, gatekeepers, reporters, bystanders, producers and

go-betweens,thattogetherincomplexrelationsco-constructthemixthatbothenablesand

constrainsthelikelihoodofatrociousdeeds”(Foster,Haupt&DeBeer,2005:63).Sincemany

of these subject positions are relegated to the shadows when we consider ‘victims’ and

‘perpetrators’ to be the two primary positionswithin the dramatic arena of violence, the

rationale for a project like this – while ethically and methodologically problematic -- is

supportedbythe likesofSlavojZizek(2002:543)whosuggeststhat“thetrulyradicalthing

would [be] to focus precisely on the disturbing choices: to invite people like dedicated

racists,whosechoice-whosedifference-doesmakeadifference”.

AlthoughthegoalsofthisworkaregenerallyinagreementwithZizek’sstatementabove,itis

necessarytoelucidatethattheobjectivesofdelving into“disturbingchoices” inKashmir–

with Militants/Ex-militants and the Indian Armed Forces in particular – have not been

designedwiththeintentionofcondoningorjustifyingactsofviolence.AsDonFoster,Paul

Haupt,andMarésaDeBeer(2005)proposeintheirworkwithamultitudeof‘perpetrators’

of apartheid in SouthAfrica, there is an importantneed to clarifywhenworkingwithany

kindof ‘perpetrator’of violence, thedifferentiationbetweenunderstanding andempathy.

Fosteretal.(2005:90)drawfromaleadingHolocaustscholar,ChristopherBrowning(1992),

whowritesthat“Explainingisnotexcusing,understandingisnotforgiving”andinthespirit

of Browning’s statement, this project’s use of theatre to work across and between

individuals/groups who are considered ‘perpetrators’ does not seek to excuse or forgive

their violent acts. However, and here I differ slightly from Browning, neither is this work

about addressing acts of violencewith the purpose of explaining or understanding them.

Rather, in keeping with the shadowy, non-places referred to earlier, this doctoral

6

undertaking (simply) attempts a theatre-based approach to Kashmir’s grey zones by

includingvoicesthatspeakto“disturbingchoices”(Zizek,2002:543).

Although this project moves away from the existing binary between ‘victim’ and

‘perpetrator’, the problematic of setting up another kind of categorisation through

categories like Civil Society, Militant/Ex-Militant, and Armed Forces comes with its own

ethical and political quagmires. How might this project negotiate the risks of

“sensationalising”or“sentimentalising” the figuresof thecivilian,militant/ex-militant,and

the soldier (Foster, Haupt & De Beer, 2005:52)? When delving into the grey zones of

Kashmir,howmighttheperilsofwhatRitaBarnard(2006)describes inherexaminationof

the OprahWinfrey Book Club phenomenon as the “glamour of misery” which generates

“therapeutic biographies” that lead to a romanticisation of suffering and redemption be

evaded(inMackey,2013:102)?Howmightthiswritingbecognizantofthepoliticsof“whois

able to tell the truth, about what, with what consequences, and with what relation to

power”,whileacknowledgingtherisksofparticipating ina“cultureoftestimony”(Mackey

2013:101)? Indealingwith these complexquestions “Iwouldbe lying if I said that all the

theoretical implicationswereclear tomebeforedesigning theproject”;muchof the time

thepractice inthisdoctoralprojectwas“atrial-and-errorexperience”andthetheorythat

exists“hasbeenderivedfrommyexperiences”(Schinina,2004:34).

Despitethemanyquestionsthatarise insuchaneffort,usingtheatre inthegreyzonesof

Kashmir contains one remarkable possibility: of being simultaneously an aesthetic and

anthropologicaltoolthatmightgenerate“anewunderstandingoftheproblem”withoutthe

requirement of having “to solve it” (Massachusetts Institute of Technology Open

Courseware, 2007). Although, like Guglielmo Schinina says above, not all the theoretical

implicationsofusingtheatreinKashmirwerecleartomeatthebeginning,mydesiretouse

theatreasatooltowardattemptinganewunderstandingofJ&K’sconflictswasarticulated

bytakingfromDwightConquergood’s(1991)insistenceonthepoweroftheatricalprocesses

and performances to be anthropological tools. Conquergood (in Denzin, 2003:13) argues

“thatwe should treatperformances as a complementary formof researchpublication, an

alternativemethodorwayof interpretingandpresenting theresultsofanethnographer's

work”.Initsuseoftheatreasameansthroughwhichtogeneratenewunderstandingsand

interpretationsofKashmir’sgreyzones,thisprojectapproachestheoryas“itselfapractice”

7

(Barrett&Bolt,2007:116),withtheunderstandingthat“theorisingoutofpracticeisavery

differentwayofthinkingthanapplyingtheorytopractice”(BarrettandBolt,2007:33).

Thegrey zonebetween theoryandpractice, the shadowsofwar thatemergewhenusing

theatre as an anthropological tool, and thenon-placesbetween victimandperpetrator in

Kashmir all meant that this work could not be executed and articulated in a “neat and

predictable way” (Smith and Dean, 2009:214). Instead, since “the problem, or many

problems, emerge[d] over time according to the needs of the practice” (Smith andDean,

2009:214),theprojectinitsinitialstageswasframedbymultipleresearchproblems:

Researchproblem1:Settinguptheworkshops

• Whatstrategiesmaybeusedtoidentifyparticipantsandspaceswhensettingup

workshopswithmembersofCivilSociety,Militants/Ex-militants,andtheArmed

Forces?

• Whataretheconceptsthatguidetheworkshopdesign?

Researchproblem2:Executingtheworkshops

• Whataspectsoftheworkshopdesignchangeinordertosuittheneedsofeach

participantgroupandhowmightthesechangesbeanalysed?

• Whataretheoutcomesofeachworkshop?

Researchproblem3:Creatingoneperformance

• Whatchoicesguidethescriptingofoneperformancefromthenarrativesobtainedin

thedifferentworkshops?

• Whatremains/islost/isadaptedinthescriptwritingprocess?

• Whattheatricalformisdecidedasbeingmostsuitable?

• Wherecanthiscross-communityperformancebestaged?

• Howareaudiencesnegotiatedi.e.,doallcollaboratorscometothesameperformance

ordoesthecontextcallfordifferentperformancesforeachcontributorgroup?

8

• Woulditbepossibletocreatecross-communityimmersiveexperiences?3i.e.,where

CivilSocietyisimmersedinexperiencesoftheArmedForcesandMilitants/Ex-

Militants;whereMilitants/Ex-militantsareimmersedinexperiencesoftheArmed

ForcesandCivilSociety;wheretheArmedForcesareimmersedinexperiencesofthe

CivilSocietyandMilitants/Ex-Militants.

• Howdocontributorsfromthevariousworkshopsrespondtotheaestheticsandethics

ofcreatingoneperformancepiecethatweavestogethertheirdifferent,cross-

community,narratives?

Whileresearchquestionschangeandevolveeveninmoretraditionalresearchprojects,“the

practice-led researcher may find problem definition is unstable for as long as practice is

ongoing”; therefore, in a project that is predicated upon the practice of making and

performing theatre, it is perhaps only “when the practice is done that the final research

problemwillbedecided”(SmithandDean,2009:214):astatementthatwillbereturnedto

intheconcludingchapter.

AnOverviewofTheatreinTimes/PlacesofWar

Atthecoreofscholarshipsurroundingperformanceinplaces/timesofwarliestheUniversity

of Manchester’s In Place of War4 institute, directed by James Thompson. Of all of

Thompson’swork,itishisexperiencesinSriLankaandhisprison-basedprogrammesinthe

UK that guide his explorations around the subject of performance in places of war. In

Bewilderment and Beyond (2003), Thompson presents the idea of “bewilderment” as an

affectiveprocessthatdoesnotseektoclarify issues,butratherworkstocreateasenseof

bewilderment in its audiences and creators. Not only does this bewilderment, Thompson

claims,assistincreatingamoreethicalapproachtotheworkbynotoverstatingthepossible

effects of the theatre project; but bewilderment also preserves a necessary humility in

addressing the complexities of violence-ridden contexts in which these performances are

createdandperformed.AsThompson(2003:22-23)states,“Thestateofbewildermentisa

shorthandfortheimportanceandpositiveeffectofamazement,fascinationanddoubt”and

3 ImmersiveTheatreasanaestheticisdiscussedinChapterOne.4 In Place ofWar has produced a number of theoretical explorations around the idea of performance in response to violent conflict –primarilybyJamesThompson(2003,2005,2009),MichaelBalfour(2009),andJennyHughes(2011).TheInstitutehasalsocreatedavirtualcommunitythatseekstoconnectindividuals/groupsthatcreateperformanceinresponsetowar(InPlaceofWar,2012).

9

is “thepositionof thetheatre-makerwhohasconductedapieceofwork inacommunity

andstrugglestofindthewordsthatcanappropriatelyarticulatetheexperience”.Furthering

the notion of bewilderment, Thompson calls for a strong distinction between effect and

affectwhendiscussing thepotentialities of performance inwar zones. Byhighlighting the

potentialofaffectiveobjectives,Thompson(2009:182)postulatesthat:

Startingfromaffectdoesnotmeanaflightfromclearstatementsorafiercedenunciationofactsofinjustice–butgroundsitinourhumilityandlackofsuperiority.Thepause,thenour stammering, can find a voice to condemn or console – but it exhibits a tender,embodiedconnectiontothesufferingitdenounces,ratherthanitscooldetachmentfromit.

InconversationwithThompson,JennyHughes’(2011)work–alsoaspartofInPlaceofWar

– brings ‘performance’ into conversation with ‘terror’. As part of this dialogue, Hughes

investigates the importancegivento imagination in theUKgovernment’s trainingmanuals

for soldiers, while also considering acts of ‘terror’ from the recent past, like Youtube

postings of beheadings, through the lens of Performance Studies. Drawing from Theodor

Adorno(1970)andJacquesRancière(2010),Hughesdiscussestheideaofanartthatbrings

about a “capacity to shudder” (Hughes, 2011:107) and “create dissensus”, underscoring

Rancière’snotionsabout“criticalartaslackingaclearpoliticalproject”(Hughes,2011:126)

Building on these ideas, the realm of Documentary/Verbatim Theatre5 is one to which

Hughespays considerableattention,and in sodoing, suggests threeprimarymodalities in

which this form of theatre might be used to highlight themes of war and terror: the

“forensic, the exceptional, and the composed” (2011:93). By forensic, Hughes (2011:93)

referstoplaysthathingeupontranscripts/archivesthatareavailableinthepublicdomain;

byexceptionalshe“referstothestagingoftestimonyfromspacesofexception”,andbythe

composed,Hughesreferstoplaysthatarebothforensicallyobtainedfromarchivesbutalso

composedbydirectors/playwrights.Sincethisdoctoralprojectemphasisesexceptionaland

composed approaches to Documentary Theatre, this aesthetic strategy’s basis in ‘fact’

necessitatessomeconsideration.CarolMartin(2006)inherworkBodiesofEvidencedraws

on Diana Taylor’s (2003) concepts of the “archive” and the “repertoire” to present the

argumentthat“historyandmemoryexistontwoparallelbutnotidenticallines:thearchive

(documents) and the repertoire (embodied memory, oral tradition)” (Martin, 2006:10).

5IusebothDocumentaryandVerbatimhere,sincethetwoformsarecloselyrelatedbyvirtueoftheirbasisin‘archive’and‘fact’.However,intheremainderofthisliteraturereviewIonlyusethetermDocumentaryTheatre,takingVerbatimTheatretobeasub-genreoftheform.

10

Martin then suggests that perhapswhat is as important as thatwhich is recorded in the

archives,iswhatisnotthere–anideathatmightbeextendedtocommunity-basedtheatre

workshops that draw on the narratives of its participants i.e., thatwhat is said is only as

importantaswhat isnotsaid.SimilarlyChouandBleiker (2010), in theirconsiderationsof

George Packer’s (2008) dramatizations of war using Documentary Theatre, suggest that

these forms of docu-dramas become important especially in contextswhere themedia is

heavily censored i.e., that under the auspices of theatrical creation and performance,

narrativesthatareusuallycensoredinthemainstreammightbebroughttolight.

InadditiontoDocumentaryTheatre,thereareotherimportantwaysinwhichtheatreisused

intimes/placesofwar.Forexample,techniquesfromAugustoBoal’s(1985)Theatreofthe

Oppressedareoftenusedastoolstobrainstormsolutions;story-tellingexercisesareutilised

in trauma therapy – endeavours that have been strongly critiqued by James Thompson

(2005)andLauraEdmondson(2005),andofcourse,thereexistanumberoftheatreprojects

whichuseanamalgamationof techniques to representawide rangeofdocumentaryand

fictitious realities of war. This overview will now move onto a survey of theatre

practitioners/practices/projects across conflict/post-conflict zones. By beginning with

theatrepracticesfromtheMiddleEast,theoverviewfromthisregionparticularlyconsiders

theatricalinterventionsthatareconductedbyIsraelitheatredirectorsin/abouttheconflicts

inPalestine;since,asatheatredirectorfrom‘mainland’6Indiawhoiscreatingworkin/about

Kashmir,therearevariousparallelstobefoundinbeingthecitizenofa(perceived)‘colonial

power’whoseekstodramatisenarrativesofthe‘colonised’.7

In her overviewofNoraChilton’sworkwithDocumentary Theatre in Israel, LindaBen-Zvi

(2006:45) discusses Chilton’s three objectives in her work: “(1) a desire to reinstate the

voices and experiences of those written out of history; (2) a belief that the words of

individualstellingtheirstoriescanprovideapowerfulcorrectivetothemediatizedversions

ofrealityclaiminglegitimacy;and(3)arecognitionofthepowerofperformancetochallenge

the master narratives and discourses of history”. Similar to techniques used by Anna

DeavereSmith8 intheUnitedStates,Chilton’sworkisseenas"writingareactiontorather

6Theterm‘mainland’isusedtodenotethefactthatthisresearcherisfromapartofIndiathatdoesnotquestionitsallegiancetotheIndiannationstate;abelongingthatisfarmorecontentionsinJ&KandtheNorth-Easternpartsofwhatiscurrently,‘India’.7MoreinformationonthesedynamicstotheconflictsinKashmircanbefoundlateroninthisintroduction.8 More information about Smith’s work can be found later in this review.

11

thanarecordofhistory"(Ben-Zvi,2006:45).UsingMartinBuber’s‘I-Thou’relationshipasthe

basis for her work, Chilton does not only consider the aesthetic outcomes i.e., the

script/performance,butalsoconsidersthelearningprocessesinplayfortheactors–who,in

portrayingcharactersofthosewhoareconsideredas‘Other’–“learnaboutthemselves,and

breakoutoftheircocoonsofself-absorptionbytryingtoseetheirrelationshipto,andtheir

responsibilityfor,othersinsociety"(Ben-Zvi,2006:45).WhileanalysesofChilton’sworktend

toveertowardanoptimisticoutlookastotheroleoftheatreinresponsetotheconflictsin

theregion,otherworksfromIsrael/Palestinefocusonthecomplicationsoftheseprojects.

Forinstance,whendiscussingtheatreprojectsthatworkwithschoolsinIsrael,AnatGesser-

Edelsburg (2012:97) mentions that the “feelings of pessimism and hopelessness” of the

conflictbleedthroughanyattempttodramatiseit,thusreducinganysenseofself-efficacy

thatitsspectatorsmighthave.Inadditiontothestrugglesofconveyinghopeinasituationof

(seeming) hopelessness, Gesser-Edelsburg (2011:72) discusses ethical questions around

appropriation that are faced by Israeli theatre practitioners who seek to perform issues

relating to Palestine. Such questions are immensely relevant to this project and shall be

addressedinthefollowingchapters.

BritishplaywrightDavidHare’s (1999)wayof tackling theethicsofappropriation inaplay

about Israel/Palestine isto invokeauto-ethnography inhisViaDolorosa.Writtenasaone-

personshow,Hare’spiece issetagainstthebackdropofhis travelstotheregion,drawing

fromconversationswithindividualswhoholdvaryingpoliticalpositionsvis-à-vistheconflicts

inIsrael/Palestine.Situatedwithintheframeworkoftargetinghisownlivedexperienceasa

British theatremaker,Hare focussesonhis personal positioning in the region, attempting

not to explain or to make incomprehensible9 the happenings in the region, but seeking

insteadtofocusonhisownassimilation--orrather,hisattemptstoassimilate--themany

pointsofviewthatweresharedwithhimduringhisvisittoIsrael/Palestine.

Inattemptingtosituatethisresearchasonethatseekstoexploremypersonalpositioningin

relationto‘perpetrators’inKashmir,itisnecessarytoreturntotheworkbyFoster,Haupt,

and De Beer (2005) with various ‘perpetrators’ from South Africa’s years of apartheid.

Situating their workwithin the context of existing studies around the nature of violence,

9 Thephrase‘nottoexplainortomakeincomprehensible’iswithreferencetoGiorgioAgamben’s(1999)useoftheseideasinRemnantsofAuschwitz;anideathatIwillreturntolaterinthisliteraturereview.

12

Foster,Haupt,andDeBeercomplicatetheideaofthe‘perpetrator’byconsideringdifferent

approachestohowtheseindividualsareunderstood.BydiscussingHannahArendt’s(1963)

thoughtsonthe“banalityofevil”,StanleyMilgram’s(1974)experimentsthatevidencedthe

roleofauthorityinthecommittingofactsofviolence,andactsofviolencebeingroutinised

asintheRwandangenocide,TheatreofViolence(Foster,HauptandDeBeer,2005:66)puts

forththeideaofa“relationalmodel”whichseeks“ashiftinthedirectionofsearch”;where

“the origins of violence” are suggested not as being “within the enclosed figure of the

individual perpetrator, but in the constellation of relations between persons, groups,

ideologies and juxtaposed positionings”. Drawing on this relational model of addressing

conflict, Theatre of Violence complicates the ethics/politics of working across/between

‘victim’ and ‘perpetrator’ by acknowledging the skewed power dynamics that often exist

betweenmembersofthesetwogroups. It is inaddressingtheseimbalancesofpowerthat

Foster, Haupt, and De Beer (2005:90) carefully delineate the difference between

understanding and empathy (asmentioned earlier), quoting one of the leadingHolocaust

scholars in writing on Nazi perpetrators, Browning (1992:xx): “What I do not accept,

however, are the old clichés that to explain is to excuse, to understand is to forgive.

Explainingisnotexcusing,understandingisnotforgiving”.

Browning’sstatementmightbefurtherexploredusingAmartyaSen’sIdentityandViolence,

a work that is premised on the idea that a “decolonization of themind demands a firm

departure from the temptation of solitary identities and priorities” (Sen, 2006:99). Sen

cautionshisreadersthatseeingindividualsintheirsingularitiescouldleadtoadisregardfor

the plural networks and communities of which the individuals see themselves as being a

part;seeingindividualsassingularlyidentifiedthen,mightcreateadrasticallysimplifiedand

reducedunderstandingofhumanity.InagreementwithSen,thisdoctoralproject–although

consideringatripartitecommunitycategorisationofKashmiriidentitygroupsasCivilSociety,

Militants/Ex-militants,andIndianArmedForces--seekstomoveawayfromthesingularities

of identity tags like ‘civilian’, ‘soldier’, and ‘militant’, looking instead to explore themany

grey zones that exist between these categories. The exploration of such a liminality of

identitiesindramaticrepresentationsofconflictcanbeseeninworkslikeTheLine(Market

Theatre,2012),whichistheculminationofSouthAfricandirectorGinaShmukler’sresearch

ontraumaandtheatremaking.Onceagain inspiredbyDocumentaryTheatre,TheLine “is

13

constructed from a series of interviews with South Africans involved or affected by the

xenophobicattacksthattookplaceinMay2008”and“exploresthefragilityofgoodnessand

questionshowtheattackswereborn,whoisresponsible,whatmakesgoodpeopledobad

thingsandhowonecrossestheline”(MarketTheatre,2012).

Sen’s focus on themultiplicities of our identities also finds resonancewith Judith Butler’s

(2009)questioningofwhoselivesareconsideredgrievable,specificallyinthecontextofwar.

Taking Butler’s thoughts into account, not only is it integral to a project like this to look

beyondsingularidentitytagsbutalso,itisinstrumentaltoconsiderwhosestoryistoldand

whosestory isconsideredworthyofbeing listenedto.Anexampleofa literaryeffort that

recognisesmultipleidentitiesinthefaceofwar,whileincludingthelivesthatareusuallynot

considered as grievable, is Boubacar Boris Diop’s (2006)Murambi: The Book of Bones. By

invoking testimonies from survivors and perpetrators of the 1994 Rwandan genocide

alongside creative fictionalizations of the events themselves, Diop weaves together

narratives of both ‘victim’ and ‘perpetrator’ in his complex novel. A work that has won

criticalacclaimbothwithinandoutsideRwanda,BookofBonesputsforththepossibilityfor

a work of art to blur lines between ‘victims’ and ‘perpetrators’; inviting its audience to

remember and bear witness to the grey zones of the Rwandan genocide. Diop’s multi-

facetedbookisanexampleofanartisticworkthatusestheadvantagesthatcomefromthe

outside positioning of its creator and the fictional quality of its form,10 to address

questions/issuesthatwouldbeoutsidethepurviewoflocalartists–atleastforatime.

When speakingof transgressingboundariesbetween ‘victim’ and ‘perpetrator’,Mahmood

Mamdani(2001)andFrantzFanon’s(1986,2004)workconcerningtheimpactofcolonialism

on legaciesof contemporary intrastateconflictsarepositions toconsider carefully. Fanon,

discussing the many layers to the post-colonial condition, both explains why violence

becomesnecessaryinstrugglesforrevolutionandsimultaneouslycritiquesthepost-colonial

mind wherein the systems and oppressions of colonialism still abound. If one were to

consider/extendthis ideatothepsychologythatmightmakeuptheaverageIndiansoldier

whoisstationedinKashmir,ortheaverageyoungmanwhotakesuparmstofighttheIndian

‘occupation’,the(post)colonialconditions/contextsinvolvedwarrantaquestioningofthese

10Onemightusetheterm‘composed’totalkaboutworkslikeBookofBones,totakefromJennyHughes’(2011)useofthiscategory,totalkaboutDocumentaryTheatreapproachesthatcreativelyintegrate‘fact’andfiction.

14

individuals’ classification as ‘victim’/‘perpetrator’. Fanon andMamdani’s ideas around the

structural underpinnings of violence take dramatic form in a piece like PeterWeiss’ 1966

production, The Investigation. A performance thatworkswith observations/archives from

the Frankfurt Auschwitz Trials of 1963-1965, The Investigation juxtaposes accounts of

‘victims’ alongside statements from ‘perpetrators’ and judges at these trials. In so doing,

Weiss communicates the various hegemonic structures that are at playwhen considering

warandgenocide.Weiss’workhasseenmanyadaptations,mostnotablyperhaps,a2007

productioncreatedbyDorcyRugambaandIsabelleGyselinx,settingTheInvestigationinthe

context of the 1994RwandanGenocide (Tessler, 2007). ‘Victims’ and ‘perpetrators’ come

from a structurally unequal world and Weiss’ work, alongside Rugamba and Gyselinx’s

adaptation,weavesopposingnarrativestogetherinordertohighlightthestructuralviolence

thatMamdaniandFanontheorise.

Inadditiontolookingatsuchtheatricalrepresentationsofviolencethroughthelensofpost-

colonial frameworks, “peace education” is the term that Ifat Maoz (2004 in Gesser-

Edelsburg, 2011)uses todescribe strategies that seek toworkacross conflicting/opposing

groups,explainingthethreegeneralwaysofworkingtowardpeaceeducation:projectsthat

worktowardcoexistencebyseekingtobattlestereotypes,thosethatemphasisetheconflict

byaddressingasymmetricalpowerrelationsandcreatinganawarenessamongthemajority

about theexperiencesof theminority,andprojects that fallbetweenthesetworealms.A

theatre-based approach that works between coexistence and conflict, drawing together

cultures/ways of being that are in opposition to each other might be said to be

“intracultural”,asdescribedbyRustomBharucha(1993).Positingtheintraasanalternative

tothe interBharuchamentions,specifically,theneedfor intraculturalprojects inadiverse

contextlikeIndia.Intraculturalworkwould–byitsnature—bothemploystrategiestobattle

cultural stereotypes and would simultaneously draw attention to the working of

local/regional/national power dynamics. Thus the concept of intraculturalism becomes a

usefultoolwithwhichtonegotiatethelinebetweencoexistenceandconflict,whenlooking

atthisprojectthroughthelensofMaoz’sideasaroundpeaceeducation.

In looking at intracultural theatre projects that work across opposing sides in a conflict

toward such a peace education, one particular project in Northern Ireland emerges. The

15

Wedding Community Play11 was undertaken by Gerri Moriarty (2004) and Jo Egan and

involvedworkingwithgroupsofCatholicsandProtestants inBelfast.Working initiallywith

the two groups separately, the play brought together Protestant and Catholic

creators/actorsataresidentialweekendduringwhichtheirseparatelycreatedperformances

were integrated. In describing the creators’ approach to such intraculturalwork,Moriarty

speakstothenecessityofkeepingthetwogroupsapartinitiallyandworkingslowlytowarda

joint process. Realising that the participants were stepping outside their cultural comfort

zones,MoriartyandEgantookcaretoeasethegroupsintotheirfirst, jointmeeting.What

The Wedding Community Play points toward therefore, is the idea that cross-

community/peace educationworkmight not alwaysmean that all parties participate in a

theatricalpracticeatthesametime.

Adoptingadifferentapproachtopeaceeducationthroughcross-communitynarrativesThe

LaramieProject(2001)isadocudramacreatedbyMoisésKaufmanandtheTectonicTheater

Project,which is based on interviews conducted by the theatre companywith individuals

fromLaramie,Wyoming.Using the1998killingofMatthewShepardas its focus, thisplay

invokesmaterialdepictingvariedopinionsaboutthedeathofthisyoungman.Highlighting

theissueofhomophobia,Kaufmanandhisteamshowcaseinterviewswith‘victims’(people

whowereclose toShepard), ‘perpetrators’ (those involved inkillingShepard),andvarious

bystandersfromthetownofLaramie,inordertoportrayacomplexpictureofasmalltown’s

response to a violent hate crime. Ten years later, “Moisés Kaufman and members of

Tectonic Theater Project returned to Laramie to find out what has happened” (Project,

2010).TheWeddingCommunityPlayandTheLaramieProjectthereforeprovideexamplesof

intracultural, peace education-inspired practices that might be undertaken by a theatre

makerwhoisseekingtoworkbetween/acrossopposinggroupsinconflictzones.

11“TheWeddingCommunityPlay[..]wasapromenadetheatreperformancebybus.Theaudienceweretobetaken,onthebus,onthemorningoftheweddingtoatinyterracedhouseinProtestantLoyalistEastBelfastandanotherterracedhouse,justaroundthecornerinCatholicNationalistShortStrand.Theywouldbelike'fliesonthewall'--sittinginrealkitchens,bedroomsandfrontrooms--watchingandlisteningtotheaction.ThentheywouldgotoarealchurchinthecentreofBelfastforthehighlystylisedweddingceremonyandtoahotelfortheweddingreception,asiftheywereguests.Thewholeperformance,includingtravel,tookaboutfourhours...Mycolleague,JoEganandIdecidedthatwewouldbeginworkwithseparateworkshopsfortheCatholicandProtestantgroups,butthatthesewouldbeminimal--twoworkshopseachasseparategroups,beforebringingthegroupstogetherinworkshopsandataresidentialweekend.Wethoughtthattheremightbeaneed foreach tohavea spacewhere theycouldbe free toexplorewithout feeling 'censored'by thepresenceof theother.Wealsothoughtthateachshouldfeellistenedtoandknowthatwe,asworkshopfacilitatorsappreciatedtheirconcernsandideas.However,wealso felt that, if thiswenton for too long-- forexample,over sixworkshops, itwouldallowpeople to fall into traditionalpatternsofbehaviourandthinking...”(Balfouretal.,2009:133-134).

16

Similarly, Anna Deavere Smith’s plays Twilight Los Angeles (1994) and Fires in theMirror

(1998) use techniques of Documentary Theatre in order to highlight issues related to

intracultural violence in the United States (US).While the latter includes interviews with

membersfromJewishandAfrican-AmericancommunitiesinresponsetotheCrownHeights

crisis in1991,12theformerweavestogetherdifferent individuals’responsestotheRodney

Kingtrialandverdict in1992.13WrittenasmonologuesandperformedbySmithasaone-

person show, both plays involve interviews with members from opposing groups toward

presentingapiecethathumanisesan‘Other’.WhileSmith’slaterplaysalsocontinueinthis

style, it is these two ventures that brought her name into the limelight for transgressing

imaginary/real lines that exist between intracultural communities that are in conflictwith

eachother.Thepoly-vocalandmulti-narrativeschemafollowedbyworkslikeTheWedding

Community Play, The Laramie Project, Twilight Los Angeles, and Fires in the Mirror --

especiallyinthelinkingofvoicesthatstandonopposingsidesofanissue/conflict--makes

the creative processes and aesthetic outcomes of suchworks particularly relevant to this

thesis.

When looking at poly-vocal theatrical efforts that address “disturbing choices” (Zizek,

2002:543), Robin Soans’ (2005) Talking to Terrorists becomes pertinent to this project. A

play that invokes narratives from former ‘terrorists’, ex-bureaucrats, soldiers from theUK

government,andmembersofcivilsocietylikepsychologists,journalistsandsocialworkers,

TalkingtoTerroristsexploresthestoriesofthosewhohaveexecutedviolentactions,those

who were/are victims of those actions, and those who have played a role in preventing

thoseactsofviolence.Byconductinginterviewsandconsultingarchivesaroundthetheme

of ‘terrorism’, this piece has received extremely positive responses for dealing with the

questionofwhatmakessomeoneaterrorist.However,oneoftheex-IRAmenthatSoans’

team interviewedhadthis tosayabouthisowndepiction in theplay:“Icomeacrossvery

coldandcalculatinginit,andmaybeintheinterviewthat'swhatcameacross,Idon'tknow…

acoupleof interviewscan'tsumupahumanbeing, itcan'tdo it,so it'sabig leapoffaith

talkingtoanyonelikethat”(MageeinHughes2011:111);aresponsethatsumsupmanyof12TheCrownHeightsRiotwasathree-dayriotthatoccurredinAugust1991intheCrownHeightssectionofBrooklyn,NewYork.TheriotsbeganonAugust19,1991,afterachildofGuyaneseimmigrantswasstruckandkilledbyanautomobileinthemotorcadeofMenachemMendelSchneerson,theleaderofanOrthodoxJewishsect.TheriotunleashedsimmeringtensionsoftheCrownHeights'blackcommunityagainsttheOrthodoxJewishcommunity.13RodneyGlenKing(1965-2012)wasanAfrican-Americanconstructionworkerwho,whileonparoleforrobbery,becamenationallyknownafter beingbeatenby LosAngelespoliceofficers following ahigh-speed car chase.Videotaped footageof this incident inflamedpublicoutrageandangeraboutpolicebrutality,racism,andothersocialinequalitiesthroughouttheUnitedStates.

17

the ethical quagmires of this poly-vocal doctoral undertaking in Kashmir’s grey zones. It

needs to be clarified here that the term poly-vocal does not necessarily imply the

showcasingofnarrativesacrosscommunitylines;poly-vocalcouldalsorefertotheinclusion

of multiple voices from within a singularly identified group. For example: Black Watch

(Burke,2010)isaproductionthatweavestogetherpersonalstoriesofex-soldiersfromthe

ScottishBlackWatchregimentthatservedinIraq.Thispieceispoly-vocalandintraculturalin

its invoking of different soldier voices alongside excerpts from news reports and other

archives, including–bothimplicitlyandexplicitly–aninsight intothe(biased)narrativeof

theresearcher/creator.

When dealing with controversial themes, opposing groups, and poly-vocal narratives it is

useful to consider “aesthetics of discomfort”, a term that Edmondson (2009) uses to talk

about Erik Ehn’s playwriting -- as an outsider -- about the 1994 Rwandan genocide.

Edmondson draws from Giorgio Agamben (1999), who in talking about remembering

Auschwitz, discusses thosewho seek to understand/explain theHolocaust and thosewho

stress its absolute incomprehensibility; pointing out that the “only way forward lies in

investigatingthespacebetweenthosetwooptions”(citedinEdmondson,2011:69).Drawing

alsofromMichaelTaussig(1986)whocallsfora“poeticsofdestructionandrevelation”(in

Edmondson,2009:69)whentalkingaboutviolence,Edmondsondeclaresthatseekinganart

thatdiscomfitsandtroublesthecategoriesofviolenceisperhapstheonlyethicalwayforan

outside theatremaker to dealwith a conflict inwhich she has nopart. Placing an ethical

questioningof theaestheticisationofviolencealongsideTaussig’s ideas,Edmondson lauds

Ehn for not attempting to explain the causes (the why) of the Rwandan genocide and

choosinginsteadtoconcedea“dramaturgicaldefeat”(Edmondson,2009:79).Edmondson’s

analysisisprimarilybasedonEhn’splayMariaKizito(2008)thathasasitsprotagonistaHutu

nun,who is a ‘perpetrator’ of thegenocide.Byaddressing this contentiousnarrative, Ehn

blurs fact and fiction through an aesthetics of discomfort. In so doing Maria Kizito

complicatesthevictim/perpetratorbinarybyexemplifyingwhatHughes(2011:9)describes

as “aesthetics of uncertainty”. Borrowing from Janet Wolff (2008:5), Hughes (2011:9)

describes the aesthetics of uncertainty as an approach that involves “looking to the

marginal, indirect and oblique in artistic practice for a 'new discourse of valuewithout a

foundationincertaintiesoruniversals”.

18

Consequently, by being rooted in a theatrical exploration of multiple uncertainties –

betweenpracticeandtheory,between‘victim’and‘perpetrator’,betweenfactandfiction--

the particularity of this doctoral project lies in the use of theatre as a practice-based

methodology to explore grey zones between Civil Society, Militants/Ex-militants, and the

IndianArmedForcesinKashmir.Whilethechaptersthatfollowthisintroductionwillreturn

toideasoutlinedinthisoverview,thefinalintroductoryelementthatisnecessaryhereisa

briefoverviewofKashmir.

AnOverviewofKashmir14

CommonlyreferredtoasJ&K,the‘Indian’15stateofJammu&Kashmirincludestheregions

of Jammu, Ladakh, andKashmir.Dividedacross religious lines, Jammuconsistsof aHindu

majoritypopulation;LadakhhasaBuddhistmajority,whileKashmiristheonlystateinIndia

thatcontainsaMuslimmajority.WhileLadakhisinvolvedinterritorialdisputesbetweenthe

governments of India and China, the question of Jammu’s national affiliation is often

broughtupindebatessurroundingwhatitwouldmeantohavea‘free’Kashmir–ithasbeen

postulatedthattheHindudominatedJammuwouldprefertostaywiththegovernmentof

India.WhenKashmir isspokenoftherefore,oneusually is referringtotheKashmirValley,

theMuslimdominatedregion inJ&K.Similarly,whenthiswritingreferstoKashmir, I refer

specifically to theValley anddonot include the regions of Jammuand Ladakhwithin the

auspicesoftheterm.

JawaharlalNehru,India’sfirstprimeminister,explainstheimportanceofKashmirthus:“We

have always regarded the Kashmir problem as symbolic for us, as it has far-reaching

consequences in India.Kashmir is symbolicas it illustrates thatwearea secular state” (in

Menon,2013:168).Nehrupledgedthatareferendumwouldbeheld“whenpeaceandlaw

and order have been established” (Menon, 2013:168) in Kashmir, giving Kashmiris the

chancetovoteontheregion’snationalaffiliationi.e.,whetherornotitwouldremainunder

theauspicesof the Indiannationstate.However thispromisedplebiscite isyet tohappen

14 Versions of this particular overview have been used in this researcher’s published articles (Dinesh, 2015a); (Dinesh, 2015b); (Dinesh2015c).WhileitisbeyondthescopeofthisthesistogiveafullaccountofthehistoriesandconflictsinKashmir,thisintroductionprovidesa general overview that is necessary to frame the subsequent work. In the chapters that follow, where necessary, more extensivecontextual informationissupplied.HoweverthoseinterestedinthehistoriesandpoliticsofKashmir’sconflictsshouldexplorethesheerplethoraofarchivalresourcesthatareavailable–someofwhicharelistedintheBibliography--basedonwhichparticulardimensionoftheconflicttheywouldlikemoreinformationon.15IuseIndianinquotationmarkstounderscorethestrugglesongoinginthestateofJ&KforindependencefromtheIndiangovernment.

19

and Indian leaders who have followed Nehru have stated the referendum will be

implemented only after Pakistanwithdraws its troops from the parts of Kashmir that the

latteradministers/occupies. Inaddition,anytalkofaplebiscite inKashmiralsobringsupa

numberof additional questions: are Jammuand Ladakhalso included in the referendum?

What optionswould the plebiscite present: stayingwith/separating from India; remaining

with/becoming part of/breaking away from Pakistan; attaining an independent Kashmiri

nationstate;or some/allof theseoptions?Since1947 therefore,Kashmirhasbeenat the

focal point ofmany conflicts. At an international level there have beenmultiple disputes

betweenthegovernmentsofIndiaandPakistanastothefrontiersofKashmir,culminatingin

the creationof a LineofControl (LoC) after the Indo-Pakwarof1972. This line separates

Indian-AdministeredKashmir fromPakistan-AdministeredKashmir16andcurrently, isa line

across which Indian and Pakistani security forces engage in combat. At a

local/regional/nationallevel,therearevariousconflictsatplayinKashmir:politicaldisputes

between the Indian central government leadership and the leaders of different political

parties in Kashmir;17 violent disputes between Kashmiri civilians and the Indian

government’ssoldiersstationedinKashmir;disputesbetweenmilitants/separatistsandthe

government’s forces/civilians, and so on. Given the many conflicts that are in motion

therefore,ImustclarifythatthisoverviewaboutKashmirisnoton“theinterstatedimension

(India-Pakistan)oftheconflict,butratherontheintrastatedimension(India-Kashmir)ofit”

(Munshi,2013:252).

When considering the intrastate dimensions of Kashmir then, there are three primary

categories/groups into which people are generally seen as being divided: Civil Society,

Militants/Ex-militants, and the Indian Armed Forces. There are of course various, multi-

faceted,affiliationswithineachof these largercommunitygroupshowever,one’spolitical

position (as amainland Indian) vis-à-vis Kashmir is often denoted bywithwhich of these

threegroupsone interacts.Generallyspeaking, thosewhomaintain linkswithCivilSociety

areassumedasholdingviewsagainstallagentsthatuseviolencealbeitwithdifferentideas

as to where Kashmir belongs; those who are keen to understand the points of view of

16 Indian-Administered Kashmir and Pakistan-Administered Kashmir are sometimes referred to as Indian-Occupied Kashmir, Pakistan-ControlledKashmir,etc.,basedonthepoliticalaffiliationsofthoseusingtheterms.17EachoftheKashmiripoliticalgroupshasdifferentagendasastowhethertheValley/shouldbeindependent,stayapartofeitherIndiaorPakistan.TheyalsoholddifferingopinionsastowhetherornotJammuandLadakhshouldbeincludedinaplebiscite.

20

Militantsareusuallyautomaticallyclassifiedasbeingpro-azadi18orpro-Pakistan,andthose

who maintain relationships with the Indian government’s Armed Forces are immediately

termed agents of India who are looking to subvert the Kashmiri freedom/pro-Pakistan

movement.Whiletheconflicts inKashmircontinue,muchoftherestof Indiaremains ina

stateofoblivionaboutthecomplexitiesoftheon-goingviolenceinthearea.19Rudimentary

(often, biased) media reports and the geographical isolation of Kashmir have led to a

widespread lack of awareness in the rest of the nation about the many nuances to the

conflicts.KashmirisspokenofeitherinsimplistictermsasanIndia-Pakistanconflict;orasa

warzonewherethesoleperpetratorsaretheMilitants/ArmedForcesbecauseoftheiracts

ofviolence,andmorerecently,Kashmirhascometobetoutedasatourist’sparadise,with

conscious attempts to eliminate narratives of violence. In themidst of this cacophony of

opinions,theaveragenon-KashmiriIndianhasverylittleaccesstoanyvarietyofexperience

when considering Kashmir. With incredible pressure to take a stand – pro-India, pro-

Pakistan,orpro-azadi–Indiansfromthemainlandeitherdonothaveanopinionabout‘the

Kashmir issue’,orwhenthey/wedo,areexpectedtochooseaside.The ideaof lookingat

theconflictsinKashmirasmulti-directional,orasrelational,isnotastancethatiscommon:

partly for fear of repercussions from ‘Other’ groups andpartly becauseof a grave lackof

information.There isa lackheretherefore,anabsenceofeffortsthatseektoexploreand

understandthedifferentpointsofviewthatareatplayintalkingabouttheKashmirissue.It

is this lack, this grey zone, which this doctoral project seeks to fill, through the use of

theatre.

WhenspeakingoftheatreintheKashmiricontext,BhawaniBashirYasir’s(2009)fellowship

thesisisoneofthefewworkstoprovideanextensiveoverview.Yasirdividesthehistoryof

Kashmiridramaintothreeperiods:“1)TheBuddhistandHinduperiodwhichlastedtillearly

fourteenthcentury(2)TheMuslim(SultanateandMughal)periodwhichlastedforanother

fivehundredyearsand(3)thecontemporaryperiodofthetwentiethcentury”(Yasir,2009).

Yasir considers the time period of 4th-7th centuries AD as being the pinnacle of the

performing arts in Kashmir, a pinnacle that began to see its decline because of the

18 Azadi is the Kashmiri/Urdu/Hindi word for Freedom/Independence/Liberty and is the term used to describe the movement for anindependentKashmirination-state.19 Statements in thisparagraph, regardingviewsaboutKashmir in ‘mainland’ India,arebasedon the researcher’spersonalexperienceshavinggrownupinthesouthernpartofthecountry, living inthewesternpartof India,andtravelingextensivelyacrosstheIndiansub-continent.

21

subsequentturbulences“after[the]12thcentury–viz-theinvasions,attacks,floods,famines,

raids,firesandepidemics”(Yasir,2009).Asaresultoftheseturbulences,archivalmaterials

such as books,manuscripts, and scripts have been lost and one of the few surviving folk

forms is the Kashmiri folk theatre form of Bhand Pather, a form in which “Kashmiri folk

performerstravel fromplacetoplacewiththeirextensiverepertoires” (Menon,2013:162)

usingimprovisation,dance,Sufimusic,andpuppetry,inadditiontodramaticdialogues.20

Yasir (2009) divides the theatrical timelineof Kashmir into sevenmajor periods beginning

with the “Dharmic Theatre (1925-1940)”, when works were based on religious and

mythologicalideas.Followingthisperiodduringwhichtheatrewasspirituallyinclined,Yasir

speaks to the emergence of a “Progressive Theatre (1941-1950)”, when theatrical works

tookinspirationfromindependencemovementsintheIndiansub-continentandparticularly

fromthepartitionbetweenIndiaandPakistan.Giventhepost-independencecontext,Yasir

presents theadventofa “TheatreofPropaganda”between1951and1960,a timeduring

whichtheatricalworks inKashmirweredefinedbypost-partitionpoliticsbetweenthetwo

nation states that lay claim to the Valley. Subsequently shaped by geo-political disputes

between India and Pakistan, Kashmir is said to have witnessed a “Renaissance Period”

between1961and1970,adecadeduringwhichtheIndiangovernmentincreaseditsefforts

to sponsor artistic projects in the region. Kashmiri plays/playwrights emerged, andBhand

Patherwasrevived.Thisperiodofrenaissance,Yasirclaims,wasthenfollowedbya“Theatre

of Revolution” between 1971 and 1979; when the Kashmir Theatre Federation was

established, artists found themselves in an environment which encouraged further

experimentation,andDoordarshanKashmir–agovernmentsponsoredtelevisionchannel–

begantosignificantlyaffectKashmir’stheatricalactivity.Thisrevolutionaryperiodthenset

thestageforthe“GoldenEra(1981-1990)”inwhichamateurandprofessionaltheatreartists

inKashmirwereencouragedbothbytheemergenceofdramafestivalsintheregionandby

effortsoftheSangeetNatakAcademyandtheNationalSchoolofDrama–twoofthelargest

cultural institutions supported by the Indian Government -- to ensure the presence of

Kashmiritheatreartistsintheventuresoftheseorganisations.However,thissurgeinartistic

productionwascriticallyaffectedbetween1991and2001inwhatYasircallsthe“BlackEra”

oftheatricalactivity.Thiswasatimeduringwhich“thetheatreofKashmirwentintocoma”

20TheartistsinBhandPatherperformindifferentspaces(betheyfields,courtyards,mountains,orstreets)andusesatiretosubversivelypresenttheiroppositiontostructuresofpower(Menon,2013:162);moreinformationonBhandPathercanbefoundinChapterFour.

22

(Yasir,2009)underthethreatofviolencefromvariousarmedoutfits,adecadeduringwhich

artisticactivityintheKashmirvalleydrasticallydeclined.Therefore,afterthedeclineofthe

militancypost-2001,amovementforartisticrevivalwasnecessary;arevival thathasseen

the revitalizationof traditional folk formsof theatre like theBhandPather, the stagingof

original andadapted texts inKashmir, theatrical toursbyamateurandprofessional artists

from Kashmir to cities in mainland India, and the occasional theatre project that is

implementedinKashmirbyvisitingartists.

Although this overviewdoesnot do justice to theparticularities of eachphasewithin the

evolutionof theatre inKashmir,Yasir’s timeline reveals two ideas thatare relevant to the

framing of this project. First, the restrictions placed on theatre during the Black Era

demonstrate the controversial positioning of theatre within Kashmir. I have been told,

during the practice aspects of this project, that theatrical endeavours are against the

mandates of Islam. Viewed as being a form of entertainment that takes the focus of an

individualaway fromthedisciplinedworshipofahigherpower,Militantsaresaid tohave

persecuted theatre artists at the height of the militancy during the 1990s. Even today,

theatre artists are cognizant of the ways in which their work might be considered

sacrilegious;puttingthematriskfromphysicaldangers(fromMilitants)andsocialalienation

(fromtheirCivilSocietycounterparts).Inadditiontounderliningthenotionthattheatrecan

bea contentiousundertaking inKashmir,Yasir’s thesisemphasises the survivalof the folk

form of Bhand Pather and provokes a consideration of the aesthetic choices in this

performancestylethathaveledtoitsendurancedespitetheshiftingsocio-politicalclimate

in the region.The survivalofBhandPatherand thecontroversialpositioningof theatre in

Kashmirarepointsthatwillbediscussedinfurtherdetailinthechaptersthatfollow.

GiventhispoliticalandtheatricalcontextofKashmirandtheresearchproblemsarticulated

earlier,thisprojectwasdesignedtooccurinthreephases.Phaseonefocussedonidentifying

civiliancollaborators inKashmirandtheprimarypartnershipthatemergedasaresultwas

withtheEnsembleKashmirTheatreAkademi(EKTA)inSrinagar.Atheatrecompanythat is

headed by alumni from the National School of Drama in Delhi, EKTA is one of themore

active theatre ensembles in Kashmir and a partnership with them was integral to the

implementation of phase two: a phase that while initially conceptualised to include

workshops with active militants, had to be redesigned to involve only Ex-militants. In a

23

similar vein, while phase three was originally designed to involve the practice of theatre

with/for/about the Indian Armed Forces stationed in Kashmir, the project design had to

adaptandevolvewhenmultipleeffortstoreachouttotheArmedForcesdidnotcometo

fruition.Regardlessoftheseconstantlyevolvingstrategies–aquality inherenttopractice-

based-research–eachphaseofthisprojectwasbuiltaroundthethreeoverarchingideasof

pedagogy,aestheticsandethics;eachofwhichwillbe furtheranalysedand framed in the

chapterthatfollows.

24

CHAPTERONE:CONCEPTUALFRAMEWORK

In creating a bricolage, the bricoleur appropriates available methods, strategies andempiricalmaterialsor inventsorpieces togethernew toolsasnecessary.Thechoiceofresearch practices depends upon the questions asked. The questions depend on theircontext,whatisavailableinthatcontext,andwhattheresearchercandointhatsetting(BarrettandBolt,2007:127).

Thecontributionof this researchproject tonewknowledge lies in theuseof theatreasa

practice-based methodology to explore grey zones between Civil Society, Militants/Ex-

militants,andtheIndianArmedForces’soldiers inKashmir. Insodoing,thisprojectwas/is

amongthefirstof itskindinKashmirandhadtoadaptconstantlytothevariousrisksthat

come with working across community lines in an active conflict zone. Furthermore, the

practice-basedqualityofthisresearchledtotheconceptualframeworkintentionallybeing

built on what Barrett and Bolt refer to in the quotation above as a “bricolage” i.e., a

borrowingof concepts fromvariousdisciplines, unified in their being appropriate towhat

mightemergethroughpractice.Asastartingpoint,thebricolageinthisproject’sconceptual

frameworkstemmedfromaconsiderationofthethreeoverarchingideasthatunderscored

thedifferentphasesofthepractice:

• Pedagogy: the principles that would shape the researcher-subject relationship in

workshops,interviews,andperformances

• Aesthetics: the artistic dimensions to the theatre performances, workshops, and

interviews

• Ethics: considerations that affected/resulted from the theatre-based researcher’s

positioninginthecontextofKashmir

These three larger ideas of pedagogy, aesthetics, and ethics are further elucidated in this

bricolagedconceptual frameworkasan interlacedconversationbetweensix concepts that

together give shape to the practice-based methodology; the six concepts of affect,

situational ethics, Immersive Theatre, Documentary Theatre, devised theatre workshops,

andperformanceauto-ethnography.

25

TheMethodology

L.HerveyWadsworth(2000:7;inBrown2013:118),theoriginalvoiceonart-basedresearch

inDanceMovementTheory,definedartisticenquiryasaresearchprocessthatusesartistic

methodsofgathering,analysingand/orpresentingdata,thatengagesinandacknowledgesa

creative process, and that is motivated and determined by the aesthetic values of the

researcher(s).Buildingonthisunderstandingofart-basedresearch,althoughsocialscience

techniques like chain/snowball sampling (in finding contacts/participants/collaborators),

textualanalysis(inthestudyofarchivalmaterial),andobservation(observingthedynamics

of workshops and performances) were employed in different stages of this project, the

practiceofcreatingandperformingtheatrelayattheheartofthiswork.BradHaseman(in

Smith&Dean,2009:6)takesthisideaofpractice-basedartisticinquiryfurtherandtermsit

“performative research” where “practice is the principal research activity” in which

practitioners“tendto ‘dive in’, tocommencepractising toseewhatemerges” (inSmith&

Dean, 2009:6). Although Haseman acknowledges that practitioners who implement

performativeresearchstrategiesborrowfromthequalitativeresearchtradition,heclarifies

thattheseborrowedstrategiesareadaptedandmouldedsoastoresonatewiththepractice

in question. Haseman says (in Smith & Dean, 2009:6), that “performative researchers

progresstheirstudiesbyemployingvariationsof:reflectivepractice,participantobservation,

performance ethnography, ethnodrama, biographical/autobiographical/narrative inquiry,

andtheinquirycyclefromactionresearch”.Haseman’scomparativetablebelow(inBarrett

andBolt,2007:151)depictsthedefiningqualitiesofsuchperformativeresearch:

Table1:ElementsofPerformativeResearch

QuantitativeResearch QualitativeResearch PerformativeResearch

‘Theactivityoroperationofexpressingsomethingasaquantityoramount–forexample,innumbers,graphs,orformulas’(Schwandt2001:215).

‘Allformsofsocialinquirythatrelyprimarilyonqualitativedatai.e.,nonnumericdataintheformofwords’(Schwandt2001:213).

Expressedinnon-numericdata,butinformsofsymbolicdataotherthanwordsindiscursivetext.Theseincludematerialformsofpractice,ofstillandmovingimages,ofmusicandsound,ofliveactionanddigitalcode.

Thescientificmethod Multi-method Multi-methodledbypractice

26

Haseman’sarticulationsaboveindicatetheimportanceofresponsivenessonthepartofthe

performative researcher, a responsiveness that demands malleability in the researcher’s

pedagogical,aesthetic,andethicalstrategies.Pedagogically,havingtorespondtotheneeds

ofthemomentkeepstheresearcherconstantlyoff-balanceanddemands--inthecontextof

a theatre workshop -- the use of a pedagogical framework that is flexible. If a theatre

workshopneedstoallowitsdesigntoevolvebasedonwhatemergesdailyintherehearsal

room,thepedagogical flexibilityelicitedfromresearcher/workshopfacilitator inturn leads

to an inevitable renegotiation of their ethical positioning. This ethical positioning then

influences how workshops, interviews, and performances are designed and composed;

qualitiesofcreationthatmakethesepracticesaestheticundertakingsjustasmuchasthey

arepedagogicalstrategies.Beingoff-balancetherefore,breaksawayfrommoretraditional

facilitator-practitioner, director-actor, and researcher-subject hierarchies and places the

researcher“besidethework[on]ahorizontalposition”wheretheyare“notabove,beyond

orlookingover,butnexttoandwith”(Thompson,2009:132-134).Returningtotheideaof

thebricolagethen,practice-basedapproachestoresearchseemtocarry“adualimperative:

to provide direction and at the same time be willing to give up control and follow the

surpriseofwhat is emerging” (Levine,2013:24). This fluidity requiredof the researcher, a

fluidity that demands an ethical positioning that is “next to and with” the work,

simultaneouslyleadstothepossiblecultivationof“anessentiallyaestheticattitude,onethat

can transform the scholarly taskof doing research into art-making” (Levine, 2013: 26-27).

Therefore,byplacingStephenLevine’snotionoftheaestheticpotentialofresearchasart-

makinginconversationwiththepedagogicalandethicalpossibilitiescontainedinHaseman’s

understandingofperformativeresearch,onecannot fail toseethecentralityofpedagogy,

ethics,andaestheticstothisproject’sconceptualframework.

TheSixConcepts:AConversation

Thefactthat,inandofitself,affecthasnopointisitscriticalpointofdeparture,andifthefactthatthere‘isnopointtoit’offendsthosewhoseekclearprescriptions,endgoalsorfixed visions, the response must be that no change is possible without enthusiasm,commitment and a passionate sense of the possibility of a better life (Thompson,2009:128).

The theatrepracticesundertaken in this researchproject couldbe seenas fallingunder a

number of different umbrellas including Applied Theatre, Social Theatre, Community

27

Theatre,andPoliticalTheatre.Whileeachofthesetermshas itsownhistories,challenges,

andpotentialsitisimportanttoclarifythatitisnotwithinthescopeofthisthesistoenter

intoadiscussionaboutwhatmightbethemostappropriatetermtoclassifythiswork.For

example,someoftheaesthetictechniquesborrowfromthebroadgenreofSocialTheatre;

certainpedagogicstrategiesaretakenfromtherealmofCommunityTheatre,andparticular

ethicalstrategieshavebeeninformedbyscholarshiparoundAppliedTheatre.Inthespiritof

abricolagetherefore,whilethechoicesofspecificstrategies(intherelevantchapters)have

been acknowledged in the context of the theatrical framework fromwhich the practices

stem,theimplementationofavortexoftheatricaltechniques–fromanethicalstandpoint–

drawsfromThompson(2005:239)whosays:

anyone brave, inspired, committed, reckless or fearless enough to create theatre in amomentofwarcannothavetheirpracticereducedtothenon-appliedortheapplied:theentertainingortheefficacious.Theworkcansimultaneouslybedonebecauseofand inspiteof theconflict:a)adistraction fromandareactiontohorror;b)a flight fromandconfrontation of painful memories; c) a celebration of resistance and mourning of itsfutility;d)apleaforpeaceandacalltoarms.

And yet the work does not have to be one of these things instead aiming to “be

simultaneouslynoneoftheseaspects,butalsoavortexofthemall”(Thompson,2005:239).

Althoughthisdeviation fromestablishedterminologiesand frameworksmight“antagonize

thedogmaofchange”(Balfour,2009:355),workingwithavortexoftechniquesratherthan

pre-definedcategoriescreatesthepossibilityforthetheatrepractitioner/researchertowork

beyondtheideologiesofagenreandlooktotheintentionalityandnecessityoftheproject’s

practice. While the ‘necessity’ for theatre-based work in the grey zones of Kashmir was

strongly and variously debated during the course of this research –more information on

these instances of deliberation can be found in the chapters that follow. What was less

contentiouswastheunderstandingthatthisdoctoralundertakingmightofferunpredictable

(albeitproblematic)setsofcross-communitywebs,interactions,andinsightsthatcouldtake

on their own trajectory beyond the confines of the project. The idea of a vortex then,

emphasisesthattheparticularpotentialofthisworkliespreciselyintheunpredictabilityof

its resonances – an unpredictability that locates the work, intentionally, in various grey

zones.GiorgioAgamben(1999)critiques,inRemnantsofAuschwitz,thetendencyforthose

whostudytheHolocausttoeitherattemptanunderstanding/explanationofviolenceorto

stress its sheer incomprehensibility. By questioning both these tendencies, Agamben

28

(1999:13)suggeststhat,“theonlywayforwardliesininvestigatingthespacebetweenthose

twooptions” i.e., in thegrey zonebetween focussingon thatwhichmightbeunderstood

andthatwhich is incomprehensible.Furtheringthe ideaof this in-betweenspace,Michael

Balfour(2007:3)drawsfromPrimoLevi–asdoesAgamben–torecognisethatthepractice

ofperformanceinaconflictzoneinhabits“agreyzone,oneinwhichitmaybeneithergood

norevil,neitherfreeofideology,norcompletelyevacuatedofhumanisingproperties(Levi,

1998:23)”.Furthermore,itispreciselythisinevitabilityofgreyzonesintimes/placesofwar

that leadsThompson(2009:111)tocall foraparticipatorytheatrethat focusses“onaffect

ratherthaneffect”:makingaffectanimportantconceptinthisproject.

Extrapolatinguponthepotentialofaffect,Thompson(2009:111)statesthatbyavoiding“the

anticipationorextractionofmeaningastheprimaryimpulseofanappliedtheatreprocess”,

the theatre practitioner/researcher in times/places of war might come to realise that

“working with affect awakens individuals to possibilities beyond themselves without an

insistence on what the experience is – what meanings should be attached”. While this

insistence on affect could be seen as an excuse for theatre-in-war practitioners to be

absolved from having to provide clear articulations for the repercussions of their work,

Thompson(2009:182)clarifies that“starting fromaffectdoesnotmeana flight fromclear

statementsorafiercedenunciationofactsofinjustice–butgroundsitinourhumilityand

lack of superiority”. Perhaps then, it would be appropriate to consider this, as Balfour

(2009:356)does,asan intentionalmoveaway from“theneedforchangerhetoric, impact

assessmentsandthestrainforverifiablemeasurementsindefiningappliedtheatre”toplace

anemphasis insteadon research that generates “propositions abouthow theatre actually

works”; a statement that resonateswith the overarching goal of this project to generate

propositionsabouthowtheatremightoperatewithinthegreyzonesofKashmir.

Thisproject’sapproach toaffect therefore, like itsapproach to thebinariesof victimhood

and perpetration in Kashmir, is strongly rooted in the idea of grey zones: nebulous and

uncertain terrain that is characteristic of theatrical efforts that seek to bemore than the

form itself. Speaking of the potential of this uncertain terrain in the context of Applied

Theatre, Helen Nicholson (2005:24) states that this “gift of theatre” has the potential to

dislodge “fixed and uneven boundaries of ‘self’ and ‘other’ [and] produce open-ended,

reciprocal relationships that support participants' identifications with a range of subject

29

positions”. Furthering Nicholson’s proposal, Jenny Hughes (2011:163) reiterates a move

awayfroma“homogeneityofexchange”,askinginsteadforagenerosityinwhich“thegift

becomes associatedwith shifting roles, spontaneity, desire, loss and risk”, thus creating a

reciprocity that can “be perceived as a provocation to theatre practitioners to place

uncertainty at the centre of their encounterswith participants”. In this spirit, this project

maintainsadeliberatebalancebetweendoubtandclarity–abalancethat inpracticemay

be struggled with, as the reader will have occasion to see in the chapters that follow.

Although some might see this lack of certainty as being disingenuous or insufficiently

rigorous,thisresearchconsidersuncertaintytoin“noway[imply]resignation”(Thompson,

2003:22-23).Instead,theimportanceofdoubtanduncertainty–intheprovocationofaffect

--isseenasastrength;onethatAmartyaSen(2006:122)substantiates,bydrawingfromSir

FrancisBacon(1605),tosaythatdoubtshavethedoubleuseofguardingusagainsterrors

andin“initiatingandfurtheringaprocessofinquiry,whichcanhavetheeffectofenriching

ourunderstanding”of issues that "wouldhave [otherwise]beenpassedby lightlywithout

intervention”.

Theimportanceofdoubtanduncertaintyfortheaffectiveframeworkofthisprojectarealso

indialoguewith ideas fromSundarSarukkai (2007a)whohaswritteneloquentlyabouthis

andothersnotionsofthe‘outsider’withregardtoanthropologicaleffortsinIndia.Sarukkai

takesfromGopalGuru(2002)whodiscussesa“moralrighttotheorize”andasksprovocative

questionsaroundwhohastherighttotheoriseanexperience;ultimatelyaskingifthosewho

do not have the lived experience of an event have the right to theorise about it. Doubt,

uncertainty, and grey zones return as important aspects in clarifying this project’s “moral

right to theorise”, prompting an articulation that this performative research project does

not,atanypoint,claimanunderstandingoftheexperienceofKashmiris.Instead,byworking

with Agamben’s in-between spaces, the ethical framing of this research involves a

cognisance of the ways in which my particular lived experience intersects with the lived

experiences that are explored through the practice of theatre in Kashmir. Ultimately

therefore,thisuncomfortablepositioningthatemphasisesthegreyzonesofpracticeseeks

tocatalyseaffectandisunderpinnedbytheideathat“thepursuitofdiscomfortratherthan

joy[mightbe]amoreproductive—evenethical—path”(Edmondson,2009:82).

30

This ethical pursuit of discomfort toward affect invokes the concept of situational ethics,

which is apost-structuralist “kindof anti-theoretical, case-by-caseappliedethics” (Becker,

1995:738). In this approach to ethics, to determine the right action, “one examines the

ethicalproblemincontextofsituations,astheyoccur"(Becker,1995:738)andinordertobe

present to ethical questions as they emerge, the theatre practitioner might be said to

“wrestlewiththepoliticsofwhentodolessandlistenmore”(Edmondson,2011:8).Finding

oneselfinthispositionofdiscomfortincreasesthevulnerabilityoftheresearcher–whichin

casesofmakingtheatreacrosscommunitygroupsinaconflictzone,renderstheresearcher

moresusceptibletodifferentkindsofharm.Thisharmstemsfrom“astrong identification

withtheresearched.Thiscanmeanthattheresearcherisunavoidablyvulnerableandthat

there is a considerably larger element of risk and uncertainty than with more formal

methods”(TisdaleinB.deMarrais&Lapan,2014:29).Furthermore,identification,discomfort

and vulnerability – as an outsider looking in – gives rise to ethical questions around the

presence/absenceof theresearcher intheworkthat iscreatedaboutthe localcontext. In

herpoignantcritiqueoffilmmakerJennieLivingston’sabsencefromherdocumentaryfilm

Paris isBurning(1990),bellhooks(1992:151)critiquesthemannerinwhichtheviewersof

thefilmare“watchinganethnographicfilm”thatdocumentsthelivesof“natives”without

being allowed an opportunity to “recognize that they are watching a work shaped and

formed by a perspective and standpoint specific to Livingston”. This invisibility of the

researcher,hookscontends(1992:151),leadstoafraughtethicalstandingwhereLivingston

“assumes an imperial overseeing position that is in no way progressive or counter-

hegemonic”.Consideringanapplicationof situationalethics to theaffective frameworkof

doubtanduncertaintyinthisprojecttherefore,wasnotonlyabouthowIwouldworkwith

CivilSociety,Militants/Ex-militants,andthe IndianArmedForces inKashmir; rather, itwas

alsoabouthowIwouldethicallynegotiateherownpositioningwithinthecontextwithout

assuming“aprivilegedlocationofinnocence”(hooks,1992:151).Therefore,byfocussingon

anethicalapproachthatwasframedbythespecificityofsituationsandthecreationofaffect

– rather than the generality of a large context and an attempt toward effect/impact –

uncertaintiesaroundpower,privilege,discomfort,andvulnerabilitywere issuescontended

withineveryphaseofthisproject.However,althoughuncertaintywasinherenttotheuse

of concepts like affect and situational ethics, when these concepts were interlaced with

31

aesthetic strategies like Immersive and Documentary Theatre, interesting possibilities

emerged.

Whenmyqueststoexplorethepotential/limitationoftheatreintimes/placesofwarbegan

innorthernUgandain2005,Isawthepotentialoftheatreinconflictandpost-conflictzones

throughthelensofAugustoBoal’sForumTheatre(1985).However,workingwithaformlike

ForumTheatrewhichseekstofindsolutionsforissuesthataudiencesexplicitlyidentifywith,

seemed to dangerously over-simplify complex histories; an over-simplification that, in

retrospect, I began to see as an effort to understand/explain violence in terms that I (in

additiontomyaudiencesandcollaborators)couldcomprehend.Giventhevariouslayersand

nuancestoworkinginacontextascomplexasRwandathen,Ibegantoseetheimportance

of working with theatrical forms that would be more ‘experimental’ and ‘novel’ to the

contextinquestion,usingtheirunfamiliaraesthetictoaddressgreyzones,ratherthanbuild

on their familiarity in the context to inspire answers and/or certainties. This aesthetic

novelty, I soon realised, was not simply about using an aesthetic form that would be

unfamiliar to localcollaboratorsandaudiences.Rather, the ideaofnoveltybegantoshow

more potential when the aesthetic form chosen was novel for the theatre

researcher/practitioneraswell.Pedagogicallyandethically,workingwithanaestheticform

inwhichthetheatrepractitionerherselfwasnotan‘expert’,createdmorepossibilitiesfor

thefacilitator-directortobegenuinelysituatedbesidetheworkandtocreatealevelplaying

fieldinwhichthefocuscouldbejustasmuchonhowstoriesofwararetoldasitisonwhat

istold.ThechoiceoftheparticularaestheticformsofImmersiveandDocumentaryTheatre

in this project therefore, emerged from outcomes of my prior experiences of

making/researching theatre in times and places of war: of desiring aesthetic forms that

would lend themselves to exploring grey zones and forms that would be novel to the

researcher,thelocalcollaborators,andlocalaudiencesalike.

With these goals in mind, Immersive Theatre and Documentary Theatre were the two

aestheticformschosenforthisresearchproject.Whiletheideaof‘novelty’isonethatIwill

return to in the subsequent chapters, an interesting repercussionof this focusonnovelty

wasitsimpactonprimaryKashmiricollaborators.WithinthebroadgenresofImmersiveand

DocumentaryTheatre,therearetwoexemplarprojectsthathaveinfluencedthisproject:Un

Voyage pas Comme les Autres sur les Chemins del’Exil (Haedicke, 2002); referred to as

32

Chemins from this point forward) and This is Camp-X-Ray (UHC Collective, 2006). Both

performancesusetechniquesfromDocumentaryTheatrethatarethenadaptedincreating

an Immersive Theatre experience for the spectators. Forsyth andMegson (2009:227‒228)

proposethatdocumentaryformsoftheatremayhavecertainfunctionsincommon,tending

to exhibit a manifestation of a combination or permutation of the following: reassessing

“international/national/localhistories”,celebratingnarrativesof“repressedormarginalised

communitiesandgroups”,investigating“contentiouseventsandissuesinlocal,nationaland

internationalcontexts”;disseminatingknowledgeinamannerthatemploys“anoperational

concept of ‘pleasurable learning’”, and finally, interrogating the concept of the

documentary. In this spirit,CheminsandThis is CampX-Ray, showelementsof these five

functions:

Table2:DescriptionsofCheminsandThisisCampX-Ray

Chemins[…]thevisitorisputintothesituationsoheorshecanlivethefear,theuprooting,thewandering,andthedifficultiesofacclimatingtothereceivingcountry(Haedicke,2002:102).

Spectators of Chemins are asked to embody asylum seekers in the European Union throughcharacter profiles given to them at the beginning of the immersive experience. These characterprofilesdocumentthenarrativesof ‘real-life’asylumseekersandwithcolouredstickersplacedontheir foreheadsas crudemarkersof their race, spectatorsareasked toundertakeactivities– likeclearing immigration lines, folding laundry forextendedperiodsof time,beingattackedalong thepassagewaysof theperformance space– as the character allocated to them. For thedurationofChemins therefore, each spectator undertakes an individual journey as an asylum seeker to theEuropeanUnion.

ThisisCampX-RayThe camp is intended to raise awarenessof thehuman rights issues around the real camp,but also toquestionthewayinwhichinformationaboutithasbeenpresentedtousbythegovernmentandmedia,and to challenge the widespread apathy over these gross abuses of international law (UHC Collective,2003).

ThisisCampX-Rayisthere-creationofaUSgovernmentcontrolledprisoninGuantanamoBayinapublicManchester building, creating two kinds of audiences. The first audience group includes ahandfulofindividualswhovolunteertobespectator-participantsandbecomeprisoninmatesforadurational performance inwhich they live/are treated as prisoners formultiple days. The secondaudiencegroupiscomposedofbystanderswhopassbytheinstallationeveryday,highlightingthewayinwhichtheManchesterresidents[whowereimprisonedinCampX-Rayatthetime]are(in)visibleinthepublicconsciousnessoftheircity.

Inaddition to theirbeing inspiredbycurrentevents in thespiritofDocumentaryTheatre,

thedescriptionsinTable2putforthastrategyofimmersionthatissharedbybothChemins

and This is Camp X-Ray i.e., the creation of an environment/experience in which the

spectator is asked to physically embody an(Other). The participants in both these

33

experiencesareasked tograft the identitiesofOthersonto theirownbodies,making the

archiveoftheOthertherepertoireoftheSelf.Thisembodimentofan(Other)isfurtheredby

anothercommonstrategythatissharedbythetwopieces:thedesignofasolitaryjourney

that each audience member undertakes, unlike the collective audience experience that

definesmanymore ‘traditional’ theatrical performances. Unlike a genre corresponding to

theTheatreoftheOppressed,forexample,whereagencyisfoundinacollectivewitnessing

and solving of a shared issue, in performances like Chemins and This is Camp X-Ray, the

spectator-participantmustnegotiateanimmersiveexperiencethatisaimedatdiscomfiting

andassaultingtheminisolation.

ImmersiveTheatreisahard-to-definegenre,asJosephineMachon(2013:xvi)hasindicated,

“becauseitisnotone.However,theuseofimmersioninperformancedoesexposequalities,

features and forms that enable us to know what 'it' is when we are experiencing it”

(emphasis in original). Etymologically, the term immersive “developed from computing

terminology,[and]describesthatwhichprovidesinformationorstimulationforanumberof

senses,notonlysightandsound”(Machon,2013:21).AttheheartofImmersiveTheatreis

the embodied experience of an event to which we are unlikely to have access in our

everyday livesandmakes, (Machon(2013:31)quotesnowfromAlanKaprow(1995)),“the

linebetweenartandlife”becomes“fluid,andperhapsindistinct,aspossible”.LikeKaprow

(inMachon2013:31),whoseeks"aheightenedexperienceoftheeveryday,inwhichviewers

wereformallyfusedwiththespace-timeoftheperformanceandtherebylosttheiridentity

as ‘audience’”, spectators in an Immersive Theatre experience such asCheminsor This is

CampX-Raymightbetermedinvariousways:asspectator-participants,spect-actors,oras

participants. Susan Haedicke (2002) puts forth a useful distinction when considering the

potential of immersive performances for its spectator-participants by drawing from Ruth

Frankenberg and LataMani (inHaedicke 2002:116) and clarifying the distinction between

“decisive”shiftsand“definitive”shifts;adifferentiationwhichenablesanacknowledgment

ofrealchangesinthinkingandaction(decisiveshifts)withoutclaiming“acompleterupture

in social, economic, and political relations and forms of knowledge [definitive shifts]”.

ImmersiveperformanceslikeCheminsandThis isCampX-Ray therefore,attempttocreate

experientialsettingswheredecisive(affective)shiftsinattitudearemadeprobablethrough

embodied,individualised,spectatorialexperiences.

34

Immersive experiences such asCheminsandThis is CampX-Rayalso resonatewithHans-

Thies Lehman's (2006) concept of the “post dramatic [which encompasses a] shift from

representation as the focus of dramatic enquiry to the relations between actor and

audience” (inShaughnessy,2012:12).NicolaShaughnessy linksLehman's thesis toNorman

K.Denzin's (2003:24) call for a “turn toaperformance-basedapproach to culture,politics

and pedagogy”, an aesthetic in which the traditional audience is said to disappear and

insteadbecomecollaboratorswho“areco-constructedbytheevent”(Denzin,2003:41). In

their re-constructions, de-constructions, and co-constructions of spectators’ identities,

pieces like Chemins and This is Camp X-Ray bring together Documentary and Immersive

Theatre to create “scenarios” (Taylor, 2009:1888), which Diana Taylor puts forward as

“frameworks for thinking” that range from the“theatrical as-if simulationsof catastrophic

eventssuchasnuclearwartohypotheticalwhat-ifsetupssuchasatickingbombtoactsof

torture”andalso “to scenarios thataim toheal victimsbyworking through trauma”.This

project’sapproachtoImmersiveandDocumentaryTheatrepiecestherefore,wasframedby

theintentiontocatalysedecisiveshiftsbothformyselfandmyKashmiricollaborators.

Although the paragraphs above speak to the potential of Immersive and Documentary

Theatre incomparisontomore ‘traditional’ theatricalperformances,theseaesthetic forms

are not exempt from the ethical, pedagogical, and aesthetic dilemmas with which all

theatricalrepresentationsofviolencemustnegotiate.RobertSkloot(1982:17)speakstothe

conundrumofmisrepresentationwhendiscussingtheTheatreoftheHolocaustandsaysthat

“thewriter on the Holocaust is caught in a dilemma: how to give stage images their full

burdenofmeaningwithoutmakingthemunrecognizablethroughabstractionoruntruthful

throughreplication”.Although thisproject’sefforts touse theatre inKashmir’sgreyzones

wasdesigned,fromtheoutset,withtheunderstandingthat“multi-sidednessdoesnotmean

equal-sidedness” (Foster,Haupt&DeBeer, 2005:62), the following chapters in this thesis

will reveal the many dilemmas around balance and misrepresentation that arose. Anat

Gesser-Edelburg speaks to the relevance of this dilemma in the context of the

Palestine/IsraelconflictsandgiventheparallelsbetweenanIsraelitheatremakerattempting

togivedramaticshapetoPalestiniannarratives,andamainlandIndiantheatremaker(like

myself)workingwiththetheatricalisationofKashmiriexperiences,itisworthquotingfrom

Gesser-Edelburg(2011:72)atlengthhere:

35

[Jewish Israeliplaywrights] face thequestionofwhichnarrative theyarepresentingonthe stage: the Jewish Israeli one or the Palestinian? If they would like to present thePalestinian side, do they have the moral and practical authority to do so? Or, bypresenting thePalestinian story through theirownconstructive statementare theynotappropriating or ‘stealing’ the Palestinian story on the stage? And if so, what is thealternative?Ifthegoalofpoliticalartistoinfluencethesocietyyouliveinandmakeitseethe perspective of the ‘Other’, does the decision not to ‘appropriate’ the Palestiniannarrative not sterilize that art and necessarily lead to silence and an absence ofmeaningfulpoliticalactionbyJewishIsraeliartists?

Mindful of all these complexities therefore, the aesthetic concepts of Immersive and

Documentary Theatre in this research had to be shaped and re-shaped based on what

emergedinthepractice.

Shapingand re-shaping the strategies adoptedmeant thatpedagogyoperatedatmultiple

levels:themostobviouslinkagebeingintheuseofdevisedworkshops;workshopsinwhich

pedagogy was conceptualised as a dialogic process that would result in the collaborative

creation of an original piece of theatre. Given that devised theatre processes are

underscored by non-hierarchical pedagogical strategies and are intended to function as

learningspacesforfacilitatorandparticipantalike, it isoftenmorerelevanttorefertothe

person conducting the workshop as the ‘facilitator-director’ and to the individuals

participating intheworkshopsas ‘participant-creators’.Suchanatmosphereofco-learning

then,inthespiritoftheresponsivenesscalledforbyaperformativeresearchmethodology,

isnotexemptfromvariousethicalquagmires.A lookatHazelBarnes’ (2005)discussionof

questions of ownership that emerge in devised theatre processes in the South African

context will reveal the multiple ways in which the affective environments of these

workshops demand a consistent, situational approach to ethics.While it was foreseeable

from the outset of this project that dialogic pedagogical ideas would frame the devised

theatreworkshopswith various Kashmiri collaborators, amore unexpectedmanifestation

was theway inwhich pedagogy emerged as being important both during interviews that

tookplacewithEx-Militants (moreon this inChapterThree)and inconsiderationsofhow

spectatorsmight best access the aesthetics of each performance. The place of pedagogy

therefore,wentbeyond itsexpectedcentrality in thedesignandexecutionof thedevised

workshopswithEKTA,affectingeverypracticeandultimately,intersectingwiththerealmsof

ethicsandaesthetics.

36

Ethics, pedagogy, and aesthetics also come together in the use of performance auto-

ethnography whilst writing this thesis. The complexities of writing about theatre in

times/places of war has been eloquently put forward by James Thompson (2005) -- who

drawsfromDianaTaylor’s(1997)thoughtsonhegemonicsystemsofpowerthatmanifestin

representations of Argentina’s Dirty War -- to justify a writing style that “presents its

oppositiontotheviolenceandoppressionofwarthroughitsdisavowalofneataccountsand

someoftheconventionsof ‘academicwriting’”(2005:5;quotes inoriginal).Therefore, like

Thompson,itishasbecomevitalformetoconsiderhowIwriteaboutmyworkandnotjust

whatIsayaboutit.Inthisspirit,thereflexiveanalysesthatformpartofthechaptersinthis

writingmightbeconsidereda formofperformanceauto-ethnographythat isdescribedby

NormanK.Denzin(2009:258)as“mystory”,whichis“simultaneouslyapersonalmythology,

apublicstory,apersonalnarrativeandaperformancethatcritiques”.Byincluding“aseries

of quotations, documents and texts, placed side-by-side, producing a de-centred, multi-

voicedtextwithvoicesandspeakersspeakingbackandforth”,themystoryattemptstore-

conceptualisehowresearchprocessesandoutcomesaresubsequentlyrepresented(Denzin,

2009:258). While my pre-doctoral efforts in Kashmir were framed through the lens of

performanceethnography,multiplevisits toKashmirover theyearshaveunderscored the

need to replace performance ethnography with performance auto-ethnography.21 This

replacement draws from complicated intracultural (Bharucha, 1993) identity politics: my

relationship to a nation that is seen by some as a ‘colonial oppressor’ in Kashmir, my

presenceasawomaninacontextthat isdominatedbymenandmale-ness,myhistoryas

someonewithHindufamilialtiesinaprimarilyMuslimcontext,andintheuseofacommon

secondlanguagetocommunicatewithlocalcollaborators.22Suchintraculturalaffinitiesand

fractures between myself as researcher and my Kashmiri co-creators, interviewees, and

spectatorsresultedinaninside/outsidepositioningthatmadeauto-ethnographicstrategies

almostinevitableinhowaprojectlikethiswasbothexecutedandwritten.Giventhevarious

intracultural markers and layers to my presence in Kashmir therefore, auto-ethnography

became central in its useof personal experience as “a startingpoint, anobject of inquiry

21 AversionofthisparagraphhasappearedinExperiencesinKashmir:AnObligationto(My)story;avirtualpresentationmadebymyselfattheObligations in Contemporary Theatre and Performance Practices colloquium that was hosted at the University of Exeter (Dinesh,2014b). Extracts from the Auto-ethnographic Excerpt has also appeared in an article in the South African Theatre Journal entitled In-betweenspaces:theatricalexplorationsfromRwandatoKashmir(Dinesh,2015b).22ThecommonsecondlanguagebeingUrdufortheparticipant-creatorsandHindiforthisfacilitator-director;twolanguagesthatarehardtotellapartintheirspoken,colloquialforms.

37

that [could]beaffirmed,critically interrogated,andusedasa resource toengagebroader

modes of knowledge and understanding” (Denzin, 2003:1). While more specific auto-

ethnographicresponseswillaccompanyeachchapter,Iincludeherethefirstresponsepiece

thatIwroteafteravisittoKashmirin2012:23

INDIANDOGSGOBACK.BeingIndianhasalwaysbeenabigpartofmyidentity.At15,ataninternationalhighschool,myIndian-nessbegan to be brought tomy attention. At 17, as an international student in theUS,my nationality came todefineme somemore - questions like "Why do you speak English?" and "Do y’all still ride on elephants?"stokedthefireofmynewfoundpatriotism.At24,itwasthisIndian-nessthatbroughtmehomeafteryearsofnomadism. Coimbatore, Pune, Ahmedabad, Paud, Thrissur,Mussoorie, Dimapur, Kupwara, Udaipur, Imphal,Kohima,Delhi,Mumbai,Bangalore,Bhavnagar,Nasik,Madras,Anantnag.Eachof theseplaceswasapartofthis all-encompassing ‘India’ towhich I felt I had to return. But after spending the lastmonth in Kashmir, Irealisethatthislistofplacesneedstobeedited.INDIANDOGSGOBACK."It's only for the Indian government and armed forces,” I was told. “We have nothing against Indians likeyou.”…Indians like me. Indians who are nationalistic in our own right. Who pay taxes to support thatgovernmentandthosearmedforcesthatyousayoppressyou.Maybeyoudon'tintendtoincludemeinthatstatementthathasbeenspray-paintedacrossmanywalls inthecity.Butsomewhere,somehow,Iamoneofthose Indiandogs.And it is impossibleformetonottakethatpersonally.AsevidenceofmyownculpabilitywithinwhatisoftendescribedinKashmirasan‘occupation’.INDIANDOGSGOBACK.IhadneverheardKashmirbeingdescribedasanoccupationbeforemytriptherelastmonth.IknewaboutthemovementforafreeKashmir,andassumedinallmy ignorancethatthiswas justonemoregroup likethosewhowerepro-Indiaorpro-Pakistan.OnemoregrouptoaddtotheconfusionsurroundingKashmir.ThereissomuchIdidn'tanddon'tknowaboutAzadi.ThemovementtowardindependencethatmostoftheKashmirisImet clamour for. Therewereof course the fewwhogreetedmeasa fellow Indian,who said their freedomfighterswereabunchofcluelessagitationjunkies.ButIcannotdenythatthesepro-IndiafolkswereaminorityamongsttheKashmirisImet.INDIANDOGSGOBACK.ThemoreIseeit,themoreIsayittomyself,thelessitaffectsme.Idon’tknowifthat'sagoodthing.INDIANDOGSGOBACK.I lookatthearmyofficerswhopatrolthestreets,whomanthecheckposts,whostandaroundbeautifulricefields for security reasons that no one else seems to understand. They look so young. So so young. And Iwonder.Dotheseboysknowwhattheyarefightingfor?“Doyouknowwhatyouareherefor?”Iwantedtoaskthese soldiers.But I couldn’t seem todo it. Because I didn’t knowwhat thatoneaction could trigger. In anatmospherethatwasfraughtwithtensionandfragility,everyactionhadapotentiallydisastrousconsequence.Thesnow-kissedhillsandcloudypeakssurroundwhatseemstobeanatmosphereoffearandmistrust.Whatareyoudoinghere?Whydoyouwanttoteachtheatre?Whatareyougettingoutofthis?Threeweeksinthevalleyfelt likeayear.Surroundedbyaclaustrophobicmalegaze, itwasdifficulttonotattributepaternalisticsocialcustomstobetheshortcomingsofaparticularreligiousphilosophy.Difficulttonot lookateverything,

23 A version of this paragraph has appeared inExperiences in Kashmir: AnObligation to (My)story;a virtual presentationmadeby thisresearcherattheObligationsinContemporaryTheatreandPerformancePracticescolloquiumthatwashostedattheUniversityofExeterin2014.

38

fromwashingclothestotakingabus,withthegenderedlensofbeingthe‘weaker’sex.Difficulttojustbe….ThegirlsIworkedwith,themenandwomenIinteractedwith,everyone,seemedtobeconstantlyunsureofwhatwasokandwhatwasnot.Isthisagainstthereligion?Ortheculture?Orthepolitics?Orthegovernment?Orthefreedommovement?Thecategoriesoverflowed.The29yearoldwholovespeltingstonesatsoldiersfromtheIndianArmy.The55yearoldNationalSchoolofDramagraduatewhorunsatheatreacademyinSrinagar.The30yearoldwhosellsgunstothesamearmythathisclosestfriendsdetest.Theteenagegirlswholovedancing.Butcannotinpublic.The30yearoldwhodeteststheIndiangovernmentbutunderstandshisarmsdealerfriend’sbusiness.The22yearoldwomanwhosinglehandedlyrunsahomeforvulnerablegirls.

The6yearoldwhoscreams“Freedom”duringtherehearsalofaplay.Completelyoutofcontext.The24-year-oldpoliceofficerfrommyhometownwhosebiggestproblemistheantiquatedpolicejeephehasforhispostinginKashmir.The30-year-oldjournalistswhotalkaboutcensorship.The64yearoldwhohasacasependingagainsthimattheSupremeCourt.Forsedition.The58yearoldmanwhohatedmybluejeans.The61-year-oldKashmiriPanditwhocanneverreturnhome.Iwentonthistripthinkingofitasareccie-afirsttriptolaydownthegroundworkforfuturetheatreprojectsinKashmir.And likemanyofmyotherexperiences, Iwokeupeverymorningwithonequestion:“Whatcantheatrereallydohere?”Teachingtheatreforthelastyear,spendingtimewithmyyoungstudentsinPune,Irealisethevalueoflong-term,multi-disciplinary approaches to learning. Just theatre itself can’t domuch. Just a three-week projectcan’tdomuch.Butwhenartunderstandsthewidercontextinwhichitissituated,andusesitspositionwithinthatcontexttonegotiatethepossibilitiesitcontains,thatiswhenthingsbegintohappen.SoIhavereturnedwithalittlemorecertainty.CertaintythatthereisaspaceformytheatreworkinKashmir.Certaintythatthereare complexities about the context that I have not even begun to understand. Certainty about my owninsignificanceinallofthis.Andacertaintythatthisexperience,thisjourney,haschallengedeverypartofmybeing–thepartthatisdefinedbymyIndian-ness,bymyfemininity,bymybeinganartist.After years of wandering around conflict and post-conflict zones, observing from the vantage point of theoutsider - here is awar that is personal. There are possible consequences to every oneofmy actions now:writingthispiece,goingbacktoKashmir,makingatheatrepieceaboutAzadi,stayingsilent.Everyactionhasaconsequencenow.Apossiblepriceattached.Suddenly,thiswarispersonal.AndI’mnotsurewhathappensnext.

Auto-ethnographicExcerpt1:Accountafterapre-doctoralprojectvisittoKashmirin2012

Inadditiontotheinclusionofauto-ethnographicexcerptsinthiswriting,performanceauto-

ethnography during the process of research manifested in the consideration of certain

aspects of Civil Society, Militants/Ex-militants, and Armed Forces lives in Kashmir as

performances. Viewing religion and gender for example, as performances, helped me to

situatemyself in thecontext; functioning, inotherwords,asanethnographic studyofmy

own life.While “it is easy to understandwhy such amethodwould be lookeduponwith

suspicion”becauseof “theexcessivepresenceof subjectivity in suchaprocess” (Sarukkai,

2007b:1409),performanceauto-ethnography “becomesa civic,participatory, collaborative

project”which involves “the sharedownershipof theperformanceproject itself” (Denzin,

39

2003:17).Therelevanceofauto-ethnography,specifically in thecontextof the Indiansub-

continent, is further supportedbySundarSarukkai (2007b)whoquotes considerably from

the Indian anthropologist M. N. Srinivas (1996) to highlight “an underlying difference

between an Indian anthropologist studying Indian tribals as against the 'foreign'

anthropologist.” Given that the anthropologist from India inhabits the “same cultural

universe”,Srinivassuggeststhat“thetribalsarenevertotallytheother”,creatingaspacein

whichtheresearcherembodiesapositioningthatmightbestbedescribedasa“self-in-the-

other”(inSarukkai,2007b:1408).Itisthisgreyzoneoftheself-in-the-otherthatIinhabitin

Kashmir,anembodiment thatmakesperformanceauto-ethnography inextricable fromthe

wayinwhichaperformativeresearchprojectsuchasthisisdesigned,executed,andwritten.

The six concepts of performance auto-ethnography, affect, situational ethics, Immersive

Theatre,DocumentaryTheatre,anddevisedtheatreworkshopsfunctionassymbioticpoints

of departure for this project’s performative research methodology; intersecting in multi-

dimensionalwayswiththeethics,aesthetics,andpedagogyoftheatrepractice inthegrey

zonesofKashmir.Buildingonthediscussionabove,thisthesiswillmoveontoananalysisof

thefirstphaseoftheproject:ofcreatingtheatrewith/for/aboutKashmiriCivilSociety.

40

CHAPTERTWO:CAGES&CIVILSOCIETY

Civil society isstillasomewhatcontroversial term,preciselybecauseof theambiguitiesassociated with it. Though it is differently defined by various theorists, “the minimaldefinitionwould include the ideaofanon-stateautonomous sphere;empowermentofcitizens;trust-buildingassociationallife;interactionwithratherthansubordinationtothestate”(Rudolph2000:1762inHeredia,2009).

Civil Society is a complex term,a termwhoseambiguity initiallywentunaddressed in this

project. Itwas assumed, in the early stages, that the identification of civilian participants

would implytheuseoftheatreworkshopsandperformanceswith individuals/groupswho,

as the quotation above suggests, belonged to a non-state-related autonomous sphere,

worked with notions of empowerment, trust, and interaction, and -- as I thought I had

gleanedfrommypre-doctoralworkinJ&K--hadneverpersonallybeeninvolvedintheuse

ofviolencei.e.,thebroad,un-nuancedideaofthe‘victim’.However,astheprojectevolved

and the resonances between Civil Society, autonomy, and empowerment remained, the

practiceofmakingtheatresoonrevealedmynaivetéinassuminganunproblematicabsence

intheuseofviolencebyKashmir’sCivilSociety.Whilenotallciviliansmightbe/havebeen

involvedintheexecutionofviolenceinthesamewayasgovernmentsoldiers,militants,and

other armed outfits, there are/weremultipleways inwhichmany Kashmiri civilians have

used violence: by pelting government troops with stones -- a strategy that has come to

define protests in Kashmir; as forays into militant groups that were later forsaken for a

multitude of reasons; and as ‘relational’ acts of violence that are far less visible in the

contextoftheobviousmanifestationsofarmedconflict.AsanalysesofPeterWeiss’(1966)

TheInvestigationreveals,“coercedcomplicity”(Thomas,2010:573)isinevitableintimesof

extended conflict – a complicity that is all-pervasive and leaves very few individuals

completelyfreefromenactmentsofviolence.ThetermCivilSocietyinKashmiristherefore

extremely murky and this project’s initial approach of using this category as a broad

umbrellatermtoincludethosewhohadneverbeeninvolvedintheuseofviolencehadto

evolve in response to practice. Ultimately, while it is not the intention to attempt a

definition of Civil Society per se, theworkshops and performances in this phase led to a

suppositionofwhociviliansinthegreyzonemightbe;apostulationtowhichIwillreturnin

theconcludingsectionofthischapter.

41

ExploringwhatCivil Societymeans in Kashmir andmoreparticularly, considering the grey

zonesofnarrativeswithin thisparticularly identifiedgroup,consistedofmultiplephases–

exploratoryworkshopsthatoccurredbeforetheformallaunchingoftheundertakingwitha

homeforvulnerablegirlsandwithstudentsatahighereducationinstitutioninthetownof

Anantnag (a.k.a. Islamabad) in south Kashmir. These twoworkshops in turn informed the

third Civil Society focussed undertaking of a three-week workshop with the Ensemble

Kashmir Theatre Akademi (EKTA) in Srinagar. Since the endeavours in Anantnag played a

significantrole inshapingmysubsequentunderstandingoftheplaceoftheatrewithinthe

grey zones of Kashmiri Civil Society, this chapterwill briefly discuss these twoworkshops

beforemovingintoacloseanalysisoftheworkshopandperformancesofCageswithEKTA.

Priortodelvingintotheworkshopsandperformanceshowever,itisnecessarytoreturnto

the concept of performance auto-ethnography and construct a framework for themyriad

waysinwhichelementsofthetheatricalandtheperformativeintersectwithCivilSocietyin

Kashmir.

Performances&KashmiriCivilSociety

AsmentionedinChapterOne,performanceauto-ethnographyisanimportantconceptthat

frames this doctoral project. However, in addition to the use of the “mystory” (Denzin,

2009:258)toteaseouttheauto-ethnographicalcomponentsinthewrittenthesis,lookingat

certainaspectsofcivilian,militant/ex-militant,andsoldierlifeinKashmirthroughthelensof

performance became particularly useful in situating myself during the workshops and

performances. More specifically, there was one question that guided this Performance

Studiesbasedapproachtothecontext:whataretheelementsthatmightbeconsideredas

performances in Kashmiri Civil Society and how might such a consideration refine the

positioning of an outside theatre practitioner in the grey zones of Kashmir? Before

embarkingon thisquestion though, itmustbe clarified thatwhile this sectionapplies the

lens of performance to aspects that fall within the scope of civilian life in Kashmir, it is

certainly not the intention of this work to suggest that the individuals enacting these

performances consider them as such. In other words, it is not about asking what is

performance; rather, to borrow from Richard Schechner’s (1995) distinction, it is about

considering what an exploration of these elements as performances might contribute

42

toward the auto-ethnographic framing of this project. There are five elements that are

considered as performances in this section: religion, gender, political affiliations, protest,

and film, each of which have contributed to the performance-based auto-ethnography in

multi-dimensionalways.

Asensitivesubject,thecentralityofreligionintheeverydaylifeofKashmirisisundeniable:

fromthecalloftheazaan24 thatpunctuates life ineveryKashmiritownandvillage;tothe

nimaaz25thatmustbepractisedmultipletimesoverthecourseofoneday;topersonaland

familial rituals that connote an individual/community’s approach to religiosity. Religiosity

manifestsinhowonecostumesoneselfinpublicspheres,inthekindsofreligiousreferences

thatemergeinanindividual’sspeechpatterns,inthemovements/choreographiesofspecific

religious rituals, and theways inwhichmen andwomen navigate spaces, reverently and

irreverently.PerformancesofreligiousidentityinKashmirtherefore,mightbesaidtolinkto

a social and cultural fabric in which the performative elements of clothing, speech, body

language, and sites coalesce toward revealing (to thosewhounderstand those codes) the

socio-political web in which each particular performer is entwined. Furthermore, in the

specific context of this research project, religious practices affected workshop and

performanceschedules,26religiousbeliefsdictatedwhatkindoflanguagewaspermissiblein

ourplays,andreligiouscodesalsounderscoredthekindsofexercisesthatcouldbeusedin

theworkshops.

Apartfromthesewaysinwhichperformativeelementsofreligionunderpinnedthisproject,

what was particularly important to consider was my own performance of a religious

affiliation.ComingfromapracticingHindufamily,butnottiedtoaHinduidentitymyself,I

had to carefully think about how to answer the deceptively simple question that I was

frequently faced with in Kashmir: “Are you a Muslim?” While this question technically

warrants a yes/no answer in a context where religiosity is seen as an affiliation to a

particularreligiouscommunityratherthanaquestioningoftheconceptofreligionitself, it

was not a simple question to respond to. What if the person I was speaking to was

fundamentalistintheirbeliefs?Giventhecontroversialissuessurroundingtheemigrationof

24Islamiccalltoprayerfrommosques,usuallybroadcastthroughloudspeakersfivetimesaday.25Theritualisticprayerthatfollowstheazaan,practicedfivetimesaday.26 For example: my first workshop with EKTA took place while actors were fasting for Ramadan and as a consequence, could not dophysicallydemandingexercises.Inaddition,thetimesatwhichoursessionsbeganandendedwereinfluencedbywhentheactorsneededtoprayand/orbreaktheirfasts.Moreonthislaterinthischapter.

43

Kashmiri Hindus from the Valley and the larger Hindu-Muslim conflicts that dominate

narrativesintheIndiansub-continent,wouldIjustbeseenaspartofalarger,conservative,

HindumajorityifIansweredinthenegative(thatIwasnotMuslim)?However,wasIwilling

to lie, answer in the affirmative, and altermy performances so as tomitigate the risk of

being seen as the Other; since a change in clothing and certain physical/verbal

characteristics would easily enable me to ‘pass’ as Muslim in Kashmir? After initially

stuttered responses that explicitly indicated my discomfort at being asked about my

religiousaffiliation, Ibegantoansweras follows:“My family isHindu. Iamnotanything”.

This response seemed to destabilise a possibly contentious conversation by moving the

exchangesawayfromthepotentiallypolarisingbinariesofHinduandMuslim,tonebulous

greyzonesofreligiousidentity.Inacontextwherereligionisgenerallyassumedtobepartof

everyindividual’sdailylife,anencounterwithan(Other)whoclaimednoreligion–whichis

of course different from being anti religion -- allowed an in-between space that

circumventedsimplisticaffiliations.

In addition to religion, an important element to consider as performance in Kashmir, is

gender.Giventhattheperformativityofgenderhasbeenwidelydiscussed intherealmof

Performance Studies, the focus here is not about justifying if/how gender in Kashmir is

performative. Instead, by starting from the premise that Judith Butler’s (1990) notions

aroundtheperformativityofgenderarerelevanttotheKashmiricontext,howmightreading

genderasperformanceassistmyauto-ethnographicpositioning.InKashmirwheremultiple

performative elements connote femininities,masculinities, and androgyneities -- clothing,

body language, the spaces that are occupied -- the complex ways in which gender is

performedandisperceivedasbeingperformed,becomesintricatelyintertwinedwithevery

aspectofcivilianlife.Therefore,duringthevariousphasesofthisworktheperformativityof

gender emerged in many explicit and implicit ways, most significantly to the auto-

ethnographic impetus of this consideration, in local collaborators’ responses to my own

performancesofgender.

While the complexities brought on by gender were expected from the outset, the all

encompassing,pervasivegenderedgaze toward this female researcherwasunanticipated.

Although thereweremultiple instances inwhich this gendered aspect tomy presence in

Kashmir became problematic, of particular note was the evolution of how my

44

unconventional performances of gender (unconventional in the Kashmiri context) evolved

withEKTA.GivenEKTA’scentralroleinthisworkandourconsistentcollaborationoverthe

last three years, there has been an arc in how my embodiments of womanhood are

responded to by my collaborators. From the first workshop for Cages where discomfort

shaped the collective experience, over the years I have come to be seen by the group’s

artists–itseems–asnotfemaleandyet,notnot-female.SinceIdonotperformfemininity

thewayKashmiriwomenareexpectedto,Iamnottreatedlikea(Kashmiri)womanandyet,

Iambiologicallynotmaleandtherefore,cannotbetreatedlikeaman.Whathasopenedup

therefore, atEKTA, is an in-between space, a grey zone,betweenbeingmaleand female.

Thisgreyzone,whileproblematic,allowsmeacertainfreedomatEKTA;afreedomthat is

hinderedassoonas Istepoutsideoftherehearsalroomandintopublicspaceswheremy

wayofperforming/beingwomanhoodhaselicitedshock,surprise,andsometimes,disgust.

Apart from my auto-ethnographic reflections, questions around gender also emerged in

other aspects of this work. For example, when mixed-gender workshops/sessions were

possible,thereseemedtobeanintergenerationaltensionthatemergedi.e.,olderpeoplein

the group were interpreted/observed as closely watching the actions of their younger

counterparts and implicitly enforcing ‘discipline’ in how inter-gender interactions

manifested.During the course ofmy timewith EKTA Iwaswitness to, andparticipant in,

many conversations inwhicholdermembersof the group commentedonhow the young

menandwomen inEKTAneeded“tobecareful”of theirbehaviour. Inparallel, theyoung

maleandfemaleactorsofEKTAhavespokentomeoftheirfrustrationsatbeingjudgedfor

their relationships with colleagues of the other sex. The omnipresence of gender then,

makes its consideration as performance to be inevitable both auto-ethnographically and

ethnographically:fromtheethicsofmywantingtodonaburkhaandescapethemalegaze

tomydifferencefromKashmiriwomenbeingpointedoutasbothpraiseworthyandopento

criticism. Each time I arrive in Kashmir therefore, I ask myself the question: how will I

navigatebeingawomanthistime?

Thepoliticsandperformanceofgender is further layeredwhenpoliticalaffiliations come

intoplay;affiliationsthatpresent inmyriadways inKashmir: in louddeclarations inpublic

spaces, in hushed conversations in restaurants and street corners, in heated arguments

withinhouseholdsandrehearsalspaces,andindiatribesthatarecirculatedonsocialmedia.

45

The ways in which members of the ambiguously categorised Civil Society perform their

politicalaffiliationsin/aboutKashmirareperformancestowhichIpaidcloseattentionwhen

assessing risks during this project.Who the visitor is, where s/he is from, andwhat s/he

represents dictate how political affiliations are shared in interviews and workshops, and

therefore,observationsofhow individuals’performed/wereperceivedasperforming their

political affiliations were vital before I entered any new space. In informing my risk

assessments with information on how individuals/groups performed their political

affiliations, there is one fundamental question that framed my observations: does the

person/groupperformacertaindegreeofopennesstowardengagingwithamainlandIndian

woman-theatre-maker? This was not a scientific process where I could always logically

deconstruct an individual’s speech/actions to evaluate the risks of engagement.However,

likemostpractice-based-researchprojectsthathavetoadoptapositionofsituationalethics

andevolvewithwhatemerges, Iwould interpretpoliticalaffiliationsfromspeechpatterns

andbodylanguage,usingthoseinterpretationstothenguidemyassessmentofriskinthat

instance.

Analogouswithhowgenderandreligionaffectedmyauto-ethnographicruminations,Ialso

hadtocarefullyconsiderhowIwouldperformmyownpoliticalaffiliations(orlackthereof)

in each instance. While I do not have a particular political affiliation with regard to the

conflicts in Kashmir -- in fact it is the absence of any personal affiliation that drives this

project’sgoaltoworkinthegreyzones–anabsenceofapoliticalaffiliationinatimeofwar

becomes apolitical affiliation in itself. I soon realised thatmy lackof a clearly articulated

politicalpositionofwhereKashmirshouldbelongwasviewedwithsuspicionbymanyofthe

people I met: was I not choosing a side because I did not know the difference between

‘victim’and‘perpetrator’,orbetween‘right’and‘wrong’?WasIperformingneutralitywhen

I actually had a deep-seated agenda/bias behind thework?Was I an ignorant do-gooder

from mainland India who did not care enough to actually take a stand; using

Kashmir/Kashmiris as ‘subjects’ in a doctoral project? Neutrality, or the lack of political

affiliationsinKashmir,wasascontentiousashavingoneandthislackofaffiliationbecame/is

problematic during my practice. As James Thompson (2003:195) has said, “if we do not

articulatewhywedothework,someoneelsewilldoitforus”--so,howwouldIarticulate

andperformmyneutralpoliticalaffiliationwithoutdiscountingthevaliddesireforonefrom

46

myKashmiricollaborators?AlthoughmypoliticalopinionsastowhereKashmirbelongsare

asuncertainnowastheywerewhenIbeganthiswork,thisquestionoftenbecameapoint

ofcontentionwithmymorecriticalco-creators,interviewees,andspectators.Myparticular

(a)political stand is understandably seen, by some, as being disingenuous; since how one

alignswith India/Pakistan/Kashmiri independence in turn frames the entire realm of Civil

Societyprotest.

While the realm of protest is one in which many performative strategies are at use in

Kashmir, I shallcite twospecificexampleshere: thatof theprotests thatareorganisedby

the familymembers of the disappeared in the Association of the Parents of Disappeared

Persons(APDP)andthetechniquesadoptedbystone-peltersasaformofprotestagainstthe

IndianArmedForces.Ichoosethesetwoexamplesbecausetheformer,APDP,isapowerful

instance of Kashmiri women breaking the male dominance of public spaces albeit in an

acceptablewayi.e.,intheirrolesasgrievingmothers/wives.Thesecondexampleofprotest

–ofthestone-pelters–hasbeenchosenbecauseofitsubiquityi.e.,almosteveryKashmiri

civilian I have met has engaged in pelting stones at the Armed Forces at some point or

another. The importance of these two examples of performative protest is especially

relevant in underlining why my own lack of a political position remains problematic in

Kashmir. For when almost everyone you meet has been part of a protest against the

disappearanceofalovedoneand/ortakenupastonetopelttheIndianArmedForces,the

grey zone that an outsider embodies when unwilling to partake in these emblematic

performances of protest is perceived as a cop-out, an excuse, and atworst, as complicity

withtheregimesofoppressionatplayinKashmir.Despitemycognisanceofhowthisstand

isperceived,anddespitehavingtofindnewwaystoperformmyneutralityethically,thisisa

conundrumthatIhavebeenunabletoresolve.Ipresentmyownuncertainpoliticalposition

asmygreyzone,knowingthatforthosemenandwomenwhotakepartinAPDPeventsand

stone-peltingprotests,myneutralityis/willalwaysbesuspect.

On the 28th of everymonth, thewomen activists of the APDP gather to demonstrateagainstenforceddisappearances.Theirprotestatprominent spots in thecapital cityofSrinagarresemblesafamilyfuneral,albeitthepresenceofsignsandphotographsofthedisappeared.Manyof thewomenweepand lament, displaying their grief in full publicglare. They sing elegies that honour the lives of their lost sons, andmake promises tocontinuesearchingforthem.Insheerexhaustionfromthepassionatelamentationssomewomenfaintwhileotherssobuncontrollably(SamarMagazine,2011).

47

With strikingparallels to theMadresde laPlazadeMayo (Mothersof thePlazaMayo) in

Argentinaa‒movementthathasbeenwidelyanalysedbyDianaTaylorandtheHemispheric

Institute for Performance and Politics in the Americas (Hemispheric Institute, 2009)--

Kashmiriwomen invoke the rhetoric of universal human rights to claim their disappeared

familymembersandfriends.Bytakingoverapublicspace inSrinagaronceamonthwhile

carrying photos of their disappeared kith and kin, the participants in APDP’s protests –

mostly women -- pursue court cases, stage demonstrations, and conduct workshops to

increase awareness about the issue of disappearances. In Kashmir especially, where “the

spectacleofpublicgrieving is indirectopposition to thevalueofprivacy,which isdear to

Kashmiri culture, especially when it pertains towomenfolk” (SamarMagazine, 2011), the

verypresenceofwomenprotestinginpublicspacesbecomesperformative.Thepresenceof

thesewomenandtheimportanceoftheirperformativeprotestinpublicspaceswillemerge

again later in this chapter, as a counterpoint to the narratives of Kashmiri womenwhich

emergedinCages,theperformancethatresultedfrommyworkshopwithEKTA.

Figures1&2:APDPProtests(Tantray,2014)

ComparedtothemothersofAPDP,thestone-pelterscreateadifferentspectacleofprotest.

Withstonesintheirhands,youngmen(andoccasionally,youngwomen)taketothestreets

of Kashmir every time there is a public ‘strike’. Referred to as a hartal, it is common in

Kashmir for leadersofpoliticalgroupstodeclareahartalonanygivendayastheirstance

against an act of injustice committed by the Indian Armed Forces, as an act of protest

againstthelocal/nationalgovernments’agendas,orasanactofmourning/commemoration.

Whenhartalsareineffect,schoolsareclosed,shopsareshutdown,anditisrecommended

that everyone stay indoors. Only stone-pelters take to the streets during hartals, hurling

variously sizedstonesat the IndianArmedForcesandwhile the identityand intentionsof

thesestone-peltersissubjectforextensivediscussion,thisdiscussionliesoutsidethescope

48

ofthisthesis.Whatisrelevanttothisprojecthowever,isaconsiderationofhowthepelting

ofstoneshasbecomeawayinwhichyoungpeopleinKashmirperformtheirresistancetoan

‘occupation’,creatingthespaceforapoliticalengagementthatcouldbeaone-timeeventin

a young person’s life or a life-time commitment. The performances of stone-pelters are

interpretedindifferentwaysbydifferentaudiences-asaninconvenience,asresistance,as

idealism,ashopelessness,and/orasfrustration.Theperformativityoftheseprotestsanda

considerationofthemasperformancesprimarilyimpactedmyunderstandingofthecontext

andofmyKashmircollaborators.Consideringtheperformativeelementsoftheactionsgave

mesomeinsight intohowmanyofmycollaborators inEKTA–especiallytheyoungmen–

hadgivenshapetotheirownfrustrationsoflivingunder‘occupation’.Lookingattherealm

of protests shaped a more nuanced understanding of the Kashmiri context for me; an

understanding thatwhilenotalwaysevident in the finalperformances,both impactedmy

interpersonal interactionwithactors/spectatorsandaidedmore informedreflectionsasto

howthetheatreworkshopsandperformancesinthisprojectfitwithinlargerconversations

amongstKashmiriCivilSociety.

Figure3:Stone-pelting(IndiaTV,2010)

My auto-ethnographic insights as a mainland Indian theatre practitioner -- who is non-

Muslim,awoman,andproblematically ‘neutral’–arealsoheavily influencedbythebroad

realm of film i.e., the ways in which Kashmir/Kashmiris are depicted through the lens of

cinemaunder the auspices of the commercial film industry of ‘Bollywood’ and in smaller,

independent documentary efforts. With regards to the former, given Bollywood’s

“investmentinmelodramaandtheinterruptionofnarrativebysonganddancesequences”

(Kabir,2010:375),Kashmir’sshowcasingbeganinthe1960swhere“thespaceofKashmiris

moulded,throughnarrative,intoapostcolonialplaygroundformetropolitanIndians”(Kabir,

2010:374).Subsequently,duringthe1970sand1980s,theKashmirvalleybecameprimarilya

“visual backdrop for romantic song sequences” and with the upsurge in the militancy in

49

1989, filmsafter/during thisperioddeliberately invokenarrativesof separatism/militancy

andforeground“theKashmiriasMuslim,engagedinadialecticrelationshipwithbothIslam

withinIndiaandtheIndiannation-state”(Kabir,2010:374-375). InallthesephasesAnanya

Jahanara Kabir (2010:376) argues that from a narrative standpoint, “the function of the

KashmirValleyremainsunchanged”. Inpre-militancymoviesaboutKashmir,“non-Kashmiri

protagonists(usuallymale)traveltoKashmir,fallinlovewithKashmiris,andlettheromance

plotdotherest”(Kabir,2010:376).Infilmsthatfollowedinthe1980sand1990s,whilethe

romantic storyline still presents, “more frequently romance implodes into theValley” and

the narrative draws on the fraught relationships and “competing world-views” of the

Kashmiriandnon-Kashmiricharacters(Kabir,2010:376).Thevalleyanditsresidentsremain

the background for these narratives that use music and romance to reflect “changing

national preoccupations” (Kabir, 2010:376): the glorification of the natural paradise of

Kashmir(asapartofIndia)inthe1960sand1970s,tonarrativesofseparatismandviolence

that focus on a religious affiliations and contain a more-than-occasional instance of the

patrioticIndianArmedForces’soldier.ItisworthquotingatlengthfromKabirhere:

Filmsofthe1990sand2000spresenttheValleywithinanewnationaltangoofselfandother,withlights,cameraandactionshiftinginsteadtoitssurroundingmountains.Asverdantmeadowsmakewayforjaggedpeaks,romanceisreplacedbywar.Earlierthespaceforsong,danceandatumbleinthesnow,theValleyisnowcriss-crossedbyarmies,infiltratorsandmilitants.ThisnarrowinggapbetweenthecinematicandtherealValleypromptsanewquestion:howhavedifferentgenerationsofValleyaudiencesrespondedtothehistoryoftheirinterpellationwithinBollywood?(Kabir,2005:94).

Kabir continues her provocative questioning of how films about Kashmir are received by

Kashmiris anddraws fromTejaswiniNiranjana (in Kabir 2005:84) to ask how “the camera

[has] negotiated the relationship between voyeurism and tourism, between tourists and

terrorists”. Speaking of the “entire generation of Kashmiris” who have grown up under

conditions of violence and “the contradictions of being emotionally alienated from and

infrastructurallydependenton India”,Kabir (2005:95)points to theconundrumofa larger

Kashmiristruggleforindependencewhilstbeing“fullyembeddedwithinanotherIndia–that

ofpopularcultureand itsattendantdiscoursesofrepresentationandpleasure”.Giventhe

widedisseminationandconsumptionofBollywoodinKashmir,justasanywhereinmainland

India,createsa“paradoxicalduality[that]mustbeseenasaspecificaspectofthecomplex,

evenschizophrenicsubjectpositionoftheKashmiri”(Kabir,2005:95).Kabirpresentsapoem

50

writtenbyAgniShekhar,a“KashmiripoetdisplacedfromSrinagartoJammu,andleaderof

theradicalKashmiriPanditgroup,PanunKashmir[who]addressesaBollywoodsongwriter”

(2005:96):

Mr,letmybleedingwounds

Sleepforsometime

Myquestionssleptjustnow.

Don’tcallmearose.

I’maforgottenmemory

I’llwakeup.

Don’tcallmeasong

I’llburnonthesnow-cappedmountain.

Iwantabalm.

Someanswers.

Theseasonofmywriting

Andvengeance.

Iamburningon

Thebackoftimepast

Andthefrontoftimefuture.

Don’tsellmeafterembellishingme

Inafilmsong.

ThecontentiousquestionsthatsurfaceinadiscussionaboutrepresentationsofKashmirand

Kashmiris in Bollywood find different resonances in the realm of documentary/non-

commercialeffortstocinematicallyperformtheValley.While“thegradualdisintegrationof

self” that is performed in non-Bollywood films seems to be generally commended by

Kashmiriaudiences,therearestillchallengesthattheserepresentationsfacebecause:

When Kashmiris in these documentaries address their problems – of needing to buybread during curfew, of attending funerals, of looking at pictures of the ‘disappeared’,sharingstoriestheymighthavetoldmultipletimes–eventhecamerabeginsto leeratthem, documenting nervous ticks, a lost limb, lingering even longer on cigarettes andchai.Suchblatantvoyeurism isnotnecessary,butwhenthe filmmakers themselvesareoutsiders,thisistobeexpected(Unnikrishnan,2011).

51

Themanner inwhichBollywoodandnon-commercial filmsperformKashmirandKashmiris

became an important aspect to consider given how many of this project’s collaborators

(spectators to the performances, primarily) were far more familiar with the medium of

cinema than the theatre. Given a general cynicism that seems to exist in Kashmir about

filmic attempts to speak about/to Kashmir’s realities, it was inevitable then that the

objectivestotheatricallyperformKashmirinarrativeswerejudgedvis-à-visKabir’s(2005:95)

“paradoxicalduality”.

Workshops1&2:Initialexplorations27

Looking at the spheres of religion, gender, political affiliations, protest, and cinema as

performancesshapedtheevolutionofmyworkinKashmir,beginningin2012inthetownof

Anantnag,whereacolleaguefromtheU.K.andIwereinvolvedintwotheatreprojects.As

aninitialventureintoexploringthefeasibilityofthisdoctoralundertaking,theidentification

ofCivilSocietygroupswithwhichtoworkwaseffectedinanad-hocmanner.MultipleNon-

Governmental and Community-Based Organizations in J&K were contacted with two

requirements in mind: that the organisation have an interest in theatre workshops for

some/all of its members and that the organisation seem ‘legitimate’ i.e., where

communicationviaphoneoremailwouldbepossiblepriortothevisitandwhereevidence

was available in the form of newspaper articles, internet archives, or feedback from past

collaboratorsattestingtotheveracityoftheorganizations’claims.

Asaresultofsuchprocesses,afewmonthsofpreparationledtomytriptoAnantnaginJuly

2012;atripthatresultedinathree-weekworkshopconductedinahomeforvulnerablegirls

andaweeklongworkshopataCollegeforyoungmeninthesametown.28Theobjectivesof

boththeseprojectsweresimple:bothfacilitatorsweretheatremakerswhowantedtoshare

their skills in areaswhere such cultural opportunities are hard to comeby. Therewas no

effectthatwasexpectedordesired;rather,inthespiritofaffect,theprojectsweredesigned

and executed with the understanding that unpredictable and intangible responses would

abound for the facilitator-directors and the participant-creators. This affect operated at

multiple levels: for theoutsider-facilitator-directors, being immersed in the contextof the

27Aversionof this sectionon thework inAnantnagcanbe found inmyarticleentitledTowardaTheatreofDoubts:Pedagogy,Ethics,Theatre, and War. The Rupkatha Journal on Interdisciplinary Studies in the Humanities accepted this article for publication in 2013however;thefinalpublicationdetailshavenotyetbeencommunicated.28 ThehomeandtheCollegeareintentionallyanonymousinthiswritingsincemycollaborationwiththempre-datedthedoctoralproject.

52

girls’homeandtheboys’collegecreatedauto-ethnographicinsightsthatwentontoshape

subsequent work in Kashmir. At another level, given that both groups of workshop

participantshadnexttonoexperiencewiththeatre,manyoftheaestheticandpedagogical

choices that were made in the execution and design of the practice contained affective

potential.

Beforeanalysing instances fromAnantnag thathaveshaped thisproject, it isnecessary to

revisittheideaofnoveltythatwasdiscussedintheintroductorychapter.Mypriorworkwith

theatre in times/places of war has led to a working conclusion that when working with

contentthatis(painfully)familiartoworkshopparticipantsincontextsofviolence,affective

theatrical interventions need to prioritise the novelty of aesthetic form. Since devised

workshops,intheiruseofparticipatorypedagogies,relyentirelyonthelivedexperienceof

their participant-creators as fodder for the theatre that is created, the importance of

workingwithnoveltybecomesanethicalchoice.Atonelevelthisfocusonnoveltyallowsfor

adistancingfromthepersonal,whichinaBrechtianfashioncreatesaspaceforthoughtful

engagement rather than emotional catharsis. Although there are arguments to be made

with regard to the potential and challenges of each of these positions of thoughtful

engagement in comparison to emotional catharsis, my experience indicates that creating

distancethroughaestheticnoveltycreatespossibilitiesforanaffectthatIdeemtobemore

ethicalforanoutsidetheatre-in-warpractitioner.Itiswiththisunderlyingideaofnoveltyin

mindtherefore,thattheworkshopsinAnantnagwereconceptualisedanddesigned.

James Thompson (2005) has pointed out that the processes of storytelling and story

collection are extremely contentious in times/places of war. By asking participants in

community theatre workshops to tell their stories of war, outside facilitators

implicitly/explicitlyforcelocalcollaboratorstoopenupwoundsoverwhichaffecttheyhave

nocontrol.Therefore,inordertopreventtheworkshopattheBoys’Collegefromfallinginto

thisethicalquagmireof story collection, theworkshopparticipantswerenotasked to say

anything about the conflicts surrounding them. Instead they were asked to write

monologuesaboutanythingthatwasontheirminds–aslongasitwasaquestion,adoubt.

Insteadofcreatingapiecewitha‘message’,whichseemedtobetheinitialinclinationofthe

participant-creators,theworkshopaskedtheyoungmentosharequestionsaboutanything

thatmattered to them.Notbeingasked to takea standbut instead, to shareuncertainty

53

seemed toheightennovelty for the youngmenwhowereused to classroom scenarios in

which there was no allowance for doubt. In addition, it soon became evident that the

CollegeoperatedinthemannerofmanyeducationalinstitutionsintheIndiansub-continent;

therewas a visiblehierarchyof power andwhenaprofessor ran a class, s/he completely

controlledwhathappenedinthatspace.Thegamesandexercisesthatwerefirstintroduced

duringtheworkshoptherefore,immediatelyhadtheeffectofcreatingbewildermentamong

the participants. The young men in the workshop did not know quite how they should

categorisetheworkshopleaders–asteachersoraspeers--finallysettlingonconsideringus

their directors. While this positioning in the context of the College still afforded the

facilitatorssomepowerintherehearsalroom,itwasnotthesamekindofpowerthatwas

afforded professors. The young men in this workshop were free to disagree with us, to

challenge us, and to pose questions at every step of the process – all novel pedagogical

approaches in that particular context. Despite these intentions however, using novelty to

allow a distancing from the intensity of the context, it must be said that with both

participant groups inAnantnag therewerealwaysmoments that forced the facilitators to

recognise the all-pervasive presence of conflict. For instance, in exploring a site-specific

exercisewiththeyounggirls,onegroupofparticipantscreatedashortskitthatfeaturedthe

characterofaking.Thekingappearedatapublicrallyinonescene,stagedonabalconyin

the home, and the children in the audience were all supposed to shout out “Zindabad

(All Hail!). In the midst of this scene however, one of the youngest girls in the group

screamedoutinstead,“Azadi”(Freedom!).Giventhatmuchofthesloganeeringthatshehad

heard/witnessed inhertown involvedtheconstantchantingofAzadi, theyounggirlcould

nothelpbutbringintowhatwasmeanttobeanexerciseofimagination,therealityofthe

contextsurroundingher.

Inadditiontotheseinstancesthatshapedmyunderstandingofthelocalcontext,therewere

manyauto-ethnographicinsightsthatemergedduringthepracticeinAnatnag.AsIreferred

to in the auto-ethnographic excerpt inChapterOne, “Indiandogs gohome”was a slogan

paintedonmanyawallinAnantnag.Whilethisexperiencewasinitiallybewilderingforme,I

understoodquite soon that theway inwhich I performedmy Indian-nesswouldmakeor

breakmyworkinKashmir.Focussingontheatreasthecentralcomponentofmypresencein

Anantnagaddressedthisconsiderationgreatly, i.e., itwasnotmy Indian-nessthatdefined

54

mypresence,justmytheatre-ness.However,whilenationalidentitywasinsomewayeasier

to navigate, what was much more challenging were questions around gender: from

argumentswithapatronisingoldergentleman29whoinsisted(daily)thatIshouldnotwear

jeansbutdon the traditionalattireofasalwaarkameez,30 tobefriendingyoungmenwho

toldme“Inever thoughtawomancouldeverbe justa friend, likeaman”.The incessant

awarenessofbeingawoman inAnantnaghasresulted inaffectivemarks thatcontinueto

emergeinunpredictablewaysyearsafterthepracticeontheground.

Whilemuchofmyeducationabout theKashmiri contextwas inspiredby these two initial

projects,theprimaryoutcomevis-à-visthisprojectwasthereconsiderationofwhoshould

comprisemyCivilSocietycollaborators.WorkingwithboysintheCollegeandthegirlsatthe

homewereextremelyeducativeexperienceshowever,itwasundeniablethataddingtheatre

tothescheduleofschool/collegegoingyoungmenandwomenwhowerealsoamateursin

thetheatre,ledtoacertainlimitationofrigor–bothintermsofartistryandintermsofrisk.

Withregardstotheformer,giventheimportanceofaestheticsinthisproject,workingwith

completeamateurspresentedasignificanthurdle.Sincetheverybasicsoftheatrehadtobe

exploredwithfirsttimecreatorsliketheworkshopparticipantsinAnantnag,therewaslittle

room for experimentation with Immersive and Documentary Theatre – aesthetic choices

that I was inclined toward. I must admit here that while there were theoretical

underpinningstomychoicesofthesetwoforms,asdiscussedinChapterOne,therewasalso

an element of unjustifiable artistic preference that underscored these choices. Immersive

andDocumentaryTheatreweretheformsthatIwasinterestedinasatheatrepractitioner

andthesewereformsthatanamateurworkshopparticipantgroupdidnotseemcapableof

workingwithgiven timeand logistical constraints.Additionally,with regard to the second

limitation of risk, it became apparent in these two workshops that working with young

people would be far more ethically problematic than working with more-experienced

colleagueswhowouldbebetterplacedtomakeinformedchoicesabouttheextentoftheir

participationinthegreyzonesbetweenCivilSociety,Militants/Ex-Militants,andtheArmed

Forces. Therefore the two workshops above, in addition to fostering a more nuanced

understandingoftheKashmiricontext,ledtoasearchforKashmiricollaboratorswhowould

both be aware of the complexities of working across community groups and speak the

29Apatronatthehomeforvulnerablegirls.30TraditionalattireforwomenintheIndiansub-continentthatcomprisesofalongtunicwornwithloosepants.

55

languageofthetheatre;asearchthatledtothefilteringofhowCivilSocietypartnerswere

chosen and resulted in an investigation into existing theatre companies in Kashmir. As a

result,inthespiritofsnowballsampling,IwasconnectedwithatheatrecompanyinSrinagar

which is runbyanalumnusof theCollege inAnantnag;a connection that tookme to the

EnsembleKashmirTheatreAkademi(EKTA).

Workshop3:EKTA

EKTA–theshortabbreviationofENSEMBLEKASHMIRTHEATREAKADEMI,wasfoundedbyBhawaniBashirYasir–(anAlumnusofNationalSchoolofDrama,NewDelhi),in1988but itcouldnotremainfunctionalafterthemilitant insurgencyin1990. Itwasagainre-invigorated in 2004 to re-enforce a new spirit and start in the erstwhile dead-theatre-movement of Kashmir, on one hand and to rejuvenate, strengthen and promote thetheatre of Kashmir, on the other. Under the aegis of the Ensemble – EKTA School ofDrama-&-Repertory was established in March 2006, to pave way for providingprofessional training in theatre-arts to the promising, upcoming and young talentedartistesofKashmir,whoaredeprivedofsuchavenuestogooutsidetheStateandatthesame time to build the artistic, aesthetic, creative sensibility and the professionalstandardsofthetheatreinKashmirtohelpittopreserveitsrichheritageandtoreachtothezenithofitsglory(EnsembleKashmirTheatreAkademi,n.d.).

MyfirstworkshopwithEKTAtookplaceduringathree-weektimeframeinJuly-August2013.

While the initialobjective for theworkshopwas to treat itasonepart in theCivil Society

component to thisdoctoralproject, this three-weekundertaking led to the formationofa

close partnership between this researcher and EKTA artists; a partnership that cemented

EKTA’scentralitytothesubsequentphasesinthisresearch.

Ethics,Aesthetics,Pedagogy&theActors

AsdescribedinChapterOne,ImmersiveandDocumentaryTheatreweretheaestheticforms

that shaped the performances in this project, so as to build on the novelty thatmyprior

work had deemed necessary in times and places of war. The choice to work with these

particular aesthetic strategies therefore necessitated a careful consideration of the

workshop pedagogy since EKTA actors were generally unfamiliar with both these chosen

formsandhadmoreexperiencewithprosceniumandscript-basedworks.31Indesigningthe

workshops,while all thewhile cognisant of the ethical dilemmas that came frombeing a

mainlandtheatremakerinKashmir,ausefulstartingpointemergedfromresearchintothe

31ThedirectorofEKTAinformedmeofthisinconversationsleadinguptotheworkshop.

56

multi-sensorial dimensions of Immersive Theatre. Josephine Machon (2013:21) says that

Immersive Theatre “provides information or stimulation for a number of senses, not only

sightandsound”;anemphasisonmulti-sensorialitythatsetsImmersiveTheatreapartfrom

other forms of more ‘conventional’ theatre performances that tend to focus on the two

sensorial processes of the vision and hearing of spectators Since Immersive Theatre is

composed ofmanifold sensory stimuli thatwork as “a patchwork quilt of sensation” that

“affectsmemory”(DiBenedetto,2010:167),theworkshopforEKTAwasdesignedwiththe

notionofa“patchworkofsensation”asitspointofdeparture.Table3providesanoverview

of theway inwhich theworkshopwith EKTAwasdesigned,with the five sensesof sight,

sound,touch,taste,andsmellatitscore.

57

Table3:WorkshopdesignforEKTA

After one week of devising exercises and training in elements of Immersive and

DocumentaryTheatre,EKTAactorsdecided that theywould like to talkabout ‘Women’ in

theirfinalpiece.34Startingfromtheideathattheconflictsintheregionhadledtoanumber

of youngmen’s killing/abduction/arrests/disappearances, EKTAactorswanted toexplore

thecomplexitiesofbeingawomaninapatriarchalconflictzonewhereavenuesofpolitical32 TheExampleofthedayoneachdayoftheworkshopinvokedthepresentationof,anddiscussionabout,anImmersiveTheatrepiecethatwasdeemedparticularlyrelevanttothe‘sense’beingexploredthatday.Forexample,thedayfocussingonSightincludedthepresentationofatheatricalperformanceinwhichspectatorswereblindfoldedandledaroundtheperformancespacebyactors,soastoheightentheaudiencemembers’sensesofhearingandtouch.ThispedagogicalstrategywasadoptedsoastogiveEKTAcreatorsmultipleexamplesofimmersivetheatricalenvironments.33SinceallthepersonschosenintheDevisingExercisethedaybefore,weremen.34AversionofthissectionhasappearedinIn-BetweenSpaces:TheatricalExplorationsfromRwandatoKashmir(Dinesh,2015b).However,extensivechangeshavebeenmadetothepublishedwriting.

Day1 Day2 Day3 Day4 Day5 Days6–14 Days15‒18

Warmupexercises/Ensemblebuildingactivities

Introductiontotheideaofsite-specifictheatre.

Devising

exercisesthatinvolvedtheconceptsof:sitespecificity,andaudienceinteraction.

Endwith

explanationofImmersiveTheatre

Exampleofthe

day32

Focusoftheday:SIGHT

Warmupexercises/Ensemblebuildingactivities

Exercisesrelatedto

Boal’sImageTheatreand

otherexercisesthatinvolvedplayingwithsight(orthelackthereof)

DevisingExercise:

Focusontheaudience’s

senseofsightandyour

understandingof,immersion/sitespecificity,andcreateapieceona

topicofyourchoice.

Exampleofthe

day

Focusoftheday:SOUND

Warmupexercises/Ensemblebuildingactivities

Exercisesrelatedto

dramaticusesofsoundsand

silences.

DevisingExercise:

Focusontheaudience’s

senseofsoundandyour

understandingof,

immersion/sitespecificity,andcreateapiecethatrelatestoapersonwhoinspiresyou.

Exampleofthe

day

Focusoftheday:SMELL,

TOUCH,TASTE

Warmupexercises/Ensemblebuildingactivities

Exercisesrelatedto

dramaticusesofsmells,tastes,andtouch.

Devising

Exercise:Focusonallfivesenses+

immersion+sitesensitivity

Topic:Awomanwhoinspiresyou.33

Exampleofthe

day

SharetheCheminsas

anexamplethatinvokesallfive

senses.

Brainstormthemesforthefinalperformance.

Topicssuggestedinclude:stone-pelters,children,youth,women,

markets,outsiderstoKashmir,differentreligions(communalviolence),storiesofpoliticalleaders,

BelowPovertyLineexperiences,KashmiriDiaspora&migrants,andKashmirishawl

weavers.

Developthepopularideas,whichwere:Women,Kashmiri

Diaspora&Migrants,andStonepelters

Basedonthe

developedideas,thegroupvotedto

chooseonetopic:Women

Writedownstories

youknowofinterestingwomen;preferablywomenwe

couldcontactifnecessary

BuildingandrehearsingCages

(Dinesh&EKTA,2013a)

11SHOWS!

58

and activist involvement are mostly reserved for male members of the population. How

were the conflicts in Kashmir affecting its women whose traditions of engaging with the

publicspherewasentirelydifferentfromthoseofKashmir’smen?

Cageswasconceptualisedfromtheoutset,throughtheexercisesonDay5oftheworkshop

process, as a performance thatwould involve only two spectators at any given time and

Table4(below)chartsaphoto-basednarrativeofhowthefinalperformancefunctioned.In

additiontothisdescriptionofwhattheperformancesentailed,thehowofCagesmightbe

looked at through the lens of what Diana Taylor (2009:1888) has called “scenarios”, i.e.,

“frameworks for thinking”. When looking at the following table then, the reader might

consider Cages to be composed of three larger scenarios: Cage #1 presents the first

scenario,whileCages#2and#3showcasetwoadditionalframeworksforthinking.Eachof

these scenarios arose from the contributions of the participant-creators, each of whom

contributedstoriesaboutwomenthattheywantedtoshowcaseinthepiece.Bringinginthe

DocumentaryTheatrecomponentthroughthisparticularmethodologicalapproach,Cage#1

wassaidtoreflectthe‘true’35storyofayoungwomaninthetownofKupwarathatliesclose

to the borderwith Pakistan,whileCages #2 and#3were said to be inspired by personal

experiencesofmembersfromEKTAandtheirfamilies.

Table3:Cages'Structure(AllphotoscourtesyofEKTA)

Cage#1

Situatedattheentrancetothehouse–ontheverandaandrightinsidethefrontdoor–isaninstallationdepictingthestoryofayounggirlwhoatthetenderageofthreehadseenherentirefamilybeinggunneddown.Frightened,thegirlhadsoughtrefuge inachickencoop inher family’sbackyard,andhauntedbythetraumaofwhatshehadseen,madethechickencoopherhomeastheyearswentby.Caredforbyherolder sisterwhohad toputher lifeonhold tobeheryounger sister’s caretaker, this storyexplores therelationshipbetweenthese twoyoungwomen.Thegirl in thecage is the first imagethatgreets the twoaudiencememberswhentheyarrive,andwhiletheguestsprogressonwardtotheother journeys intheplay,thetwoyoungwomencontinuelivingouttheirday--punctuatingtheothertwohouseholds’eventsinthemohalla/neighbourhood(below)withoccasionalsounds,shrieks,andvisits.

35 IusequotationmarkssinceIcouldonlyrelyontheconvictionofoneoftheworkshopparticipants–whocontributedthisstory–foritsveracity.Whetherornotthisstoryisfactorfiction,however,becomeslesssignificantinapieceofDocumentaryTheatrethatseekstobe“composed”(Hughes,2011:93).

59

Cage#2Oneaudiencememberisusheredinbyanactor.“Wherehaveyoubeenmysister,Shazia?”,hetellstheaudience

member,“everyoneiswaitingforyou.Wemustgoinside.”Immediatelyunderstandingthathehasbeengivenacharacterintheplay,theaudiencememberentersthebuildingwiththeactorplayinghisbrother,andistakenintoaroomwhichhesoonunderstandstobehismaternalhome.

Cage#3Theotheraudiencememberisusheredinbyanotheractor.“Wherehaveyoubeenmysister,

Shahista?”,hetellstheaudiencemember,“Youcan’tgowanderingofflikethisbeforeyourwedding!Youneedtocomeinsideimmediately.Yournewfamilyis

goingtocomesoon.”Immediatelyunderstandingthathehasbeengivenacharacterintheplay,the

audiencememberentersthebuildingwiththeactorplayinghisbrother,andistakenintoaroomwhich

hesoonunderstandstobehismaternalhome.

Theaudiencememberisaskedwearbridalclothesandawaitherfather-in-lawwhowillnowbecomingtoseeher.

Alsogivenbridalclothes,

thesecondaudiencememberdresseshimselfasabride,andisvisitedbyherfather-inlawwho

negotiateswithherbrother,the‘gifts’thatneedtobegiventothebride’snewhusband.Theword‘dowry’isnever

used,butthebrideknowsthatitisherpricethatisbeingnegotiatedanditisuptoherhowshereactsin

thatsituation.

Thebrideisvisitedbyherfather-inlawwhonegotiateswithherbrother,the‘gifts’thatneedtobegiventohimandhisson.Theword

‘dowry’isneverused,butthebrideknowsthatitisherpricethatisbeingnegotiatedanditisuptoherhowshe(astheactiveaudience)reactsinthatsituation.Anagreementisreachedbetweenthetwomen,andthebrideisthentakenbyherbrotherandleftatherin-laws’home(anotherroominthebuilding).Shebeginstorealisethatherhusbandisnotaroundandthatnooneseemstoknowwhereheis.

Anagreementis

reachedbetweenthetwomen,andthebride

isthentakenbyherbrothertobeleftatherin-law’shome(anotherroominthebuilding).Shebeginstorealisethather

husbandisnotaroundandthatnooneseemstoknowwhereheis.Herfather-in-lawandbrotherfind

outeventuallythathehasbeen‘takenaway’byunidentifiedmen,andtheyhavenoideawherehe

is.Nowconsideredpartofherhusband’shome,herbrotherleavesthebridethere,andtellsherto

becomeapartofhernewfamily.

Thebrideismadetochangeoutofherbridalclothesintomoreeverydayfemaleattire,andisputtoworkinhernewhome–cleaningrice,washingvessels,sewingshirts,makingchai/tea–allthewhilelisteningtoherin-lawstalkaboutherhusband;the

husbandwhohasstillnotbeenseen.

Thebrideismadetochangeoutofherbridal

clothesintomoreeverydayfemaleattire,andisputtoworkinher

newhome–cleaningrice,washingvessels,sewingshirts,makingchai/tea

–forcedtodowhatherfather-in-lawtellsherto.Andifsherefuses,well,hercharacterandthatof

herfamilycouldbecalledintoquestion.

60

Whenavisitorcomestothebride’snewhome,sherealisesthathernewhusbandhasdecidedtocrossthebordertoPakistan.Hesendshera

letter,andmoneytohisparents,andasksthathisnewwifesendhimaletterinreturn.Thevisitor,theguide,leavesandthebridehastogetbacktoworkinhernewhome.

Thepostmansooncomesbearingaletter,aletterin

whichthebride’snewhusbandasksfora

divorce.Fromtheletter,itisunderstoodthattheyoungmanwastakenawaybyIndianforces,has

movedtomainlandIndia,andnowhasanewwife–oratleast,that’swhatthelettersays.

Alittlewhilelater,thevisitorreturns,takesthebride’sfather-in-lawoutoftheroom,andtellshimthathissonhasbeenmartyred.

Thebridehearsthisthroughthedoorandwhenherfather-in-lawreturnsintothehome–broken–allhetellsheris,“Therehasbeensomebadnews.WeneedtodoaKhatamSharif36toprayforyourhusband.”

Thebride’sbrotherisaskedtocomeback,and

henowmusttakeherhomeagain.Inthemidst

ofthisheart-breakingconversationbetweenthe

bride’sbrotherandherfather-in-law–againaconversationthatsheisapassivewitnessto–avistorcomestotellthemaboutthedeathofa

neighbour’sson,andthattheymustcometotheKhatamSharifthatistobeheldinhishonour.

Resolvingtoclearupthedetailslater,themenguidetheyoungwifeintothespacewheretheKhatam

Shariftakesplace.

Throughallofthesestories,actionscontinuetotakeplaceinthehallwaysbetweentheroomswheretheaudience/bridesare.Creatingthemohallaatmosphere,theactorscontinueinteractingwitheachotherintheircharacters,eventhoughtheaudiencemembersarenotwatchingthem.Thisleadstosoundsfromoneconversationinvadingintoothers’spaces,enablingtheaudiencemembertoalwaysbeawarethattherearemanyotherstoriesthatarehappeningaroundher.Sheisjustonemorestory.

Theaudiencemembersare led to theprayers (in another room), andaremade to stay in thewomen’sspaceof theKhatamSharifwhile themen lead theprayeron theother sideof the roomthathasbeendividedbyacurtain.Acutelyawareofbeingseparatedfromthemenevenwithinthispiouscontext,theaudience/bridesareusheredoutoftheroomoncetheprayersend.

The actor who ushers the audience member back through the hallway andverandathatheinitiallyenteredthrough,askshimtonowtakeoffthewomen’sclothingthathehaswornoverhisownattire,andthankshimforcoming.

36AritualinIslamthatwassaidtorepresentaprayerforpeaceinKashmir.

61

As theaudiencemembers leave, they see the twogirlsagain, continuingonwiththeirlivesthatarecenteredaroundthechickencoop…

Each of these three scenarios in Cageswas meant to operate as a different framework

throughwhichaspectator-participantmightapproachthegreyzonestocivilianexperiences

inKashmir.WhilethefunctioningofCages#2and#3arediscussedextensivelylaterinthis

chapter, it is necessary to speak briefly to Cage #1: a scenario that was crafted so as to

provoke a meditation upon the idea of ‘normality’; where living in a chicken coop had

become ‘normal’ for one young woman in Kashmir. In the Kashmiri context, where

intervieweeshaveoftenspokentotheinsufficiencyofpsychologicalsupportforCivilSociety,

how would spectator-participants react to the girl in the chicken coop? The girl in the

chickencoopandhersistermeteachspectator-participantwhentheyarrivedanddeparted

fromCages,buttheirscreams,shouts,andconversationsofteninvadedthespheresofthe

othertwoscenarios.Atmoments,whentheactressplayingthegirlinthechickencoopfelt

inspired, she would physically enter the ‘homes’ in the other two cages, rendering her

presentthroughouttheaudienceexperience.Furthermore,sincethisparticularscenariowas

placed on the outer courtyard of EKTA, the girl in the chicken coop often had passers-by

stoppingtolookatherwiththesameproblematicgazeofobjectificationthattherealgirlon

whomthescenariowasbased,issaidtobesubjecti.e.,sheissaidtohavebecomeakintoa

‘tourist site’ in her village in Kupwara. Also particularly interesting were instances when

childrenfromaneighbouringschoolcametochatwiththegirl inthechickencoop,seeing

her as their peer and wanting to play with her. Cages therefore, had multiple levels of

spectatorship,similartoThisisCampX-Ray,wherethetwenty-twospectatorsweresimply

the most direct participants; differing levels of spectatorship that resulted from the

performance’semphasisonsite.

Mike Pearson (2010:8) says that a “variety of terms have stemmed from the term site-

specific performance including ‘site-determined’, ‘site-referenced’, ‘site-conscious’, ‘site-

responsive’, ‘context-specific’”. Pearson (2010:7) further states that “the term refers to a

stagingandperformanceconceivedonthebasisofaplaceintherealworld(ergooutsidean

established theatre)” and the creationof a performance in “this found space throwsnew

62

light on it”, fostering new and unpredictable relationships between the space and the

performers/spectatorswho interactwith it.ByusingEKTA’sexistingpremisesasthespace

for this performance and bymaking Cages responsive to the site itself, the performance

enabled different relationships between the EKTA building and its artists,many ofwhom

alsoliveatthepremises.Theconceptofsitewas,therefore,centraltoCagesandinaddition

to catalysinga renegotiation inhow the creators interactedwith the site, theprivateand

intimateroomsinwhichCages#2and#3werestagedbecameintegraltothecreationofan

immersive environment. Instead of performing the piece in the proscenium in one of the

larger rehearsal rooms – something that EKTA had done in earlier performances -- the

stagingoftheCages inthesmallerrooms inthebuildingthatusuallyservedasbedrooms,

offices,andthekitchenheightenedtheimportanceofthesub-textofthepiece:tohighlight

thequotidian,greyzoneconflictsintheprivatespacesofpeople’shomesamidstthelarger,

morepublicnarrativesofwar.

Creating a design like Cages demanded that EKTA’s actors be trained strongly in

improvisation, which was not difficult given how closely the actors identified with the

charactersthattheyplayed.ThescenariosthatCagesdepictedwereextremelyrelevantto

the actors’ lives and simulated their own relationships with wives, mothers, sisters, and

daughters-in-law. Therefore, a performance like Cages created what might be called

“relationalart”inwhichthe“conventional,‘banking’styleofart”isreplacedwithaprocess

of collaboration between director, performer, and spectator; a collaboration that “is

positioned as a political practice that engenders multiple authorship and multiple

ownership”(Heddon,Iball&Zerihan,2012:129).EKTAactorswereco-authorsandco-owners

of the event, creating a practice that resonateswith Alan Kaprow's (1995:239) guidelines

“whichproposethecriteriaor'regulations'fortheevent'provideforavarietyofmovesthat

make the outcome always uncertain'”(in Machon, 2013:31). In this spirit, while the

conditionsforthestoriesinCageswereset,theresponsesoftheactorschangedbasedon

thecontributionofaudiencemembersintheirownroles(asbrides).Forinstance,ifoneof

theaudiencememberswasadifficultbride,theactorplayingherfather-in-lawhadtofigure

out how best to deal with the individual in a manner that was both considerate to any

discomfort the spectator might have been feeling and realistic in the context of the

experiencethatweweretryingtodepict.Inoneofourperformancesforexample,Spectator

63

A (who had been brought to the performance by his friend, Spectator B) refused to don

women’sclothesdespitemuchinsistencefromtheactorplayinghisbrother.Athiswits’end,

theactordecidedtoimprovisebysaying“Look,youdon’twanttogetmarried?Let’sgotalk

toyourfriendandseeifshecancalmyoudown”.TheactorthenwalkedSpectatorAoverto

thescenarioinwhichhisenthusiasticfriend,SpectatorB,waswellonhis/herwaytogetting

married.As soon as SpectatorA saw that his friendwasplaying along, he toodecided to

engagewiththeperformance;anincidentthatstoodoutforthewonderfulimprovisational

skillsoftheactorplayingSpectatorA’sbrother.

Cages was viewed by twenty-two spectators over the course of four days and eleven

shows,37andgiventhat therewereparallelstorylines inthepieceandthat theactorsand

theiraudiencesmovedbetweenvarious roomsofEKTA’spremises, this facilitator-director

hadverylittlecontroloverwhatactuallytookplaceintheinteractionbetweenaudienceand

actor. Inaddition, since the textwasdevised inHindi/Urdubut finally spoken inKashmiri,

theparticipant-creatorshadmuchmorecontroloverwhatwas said than thedirectordid.

For instance, during one of the performances, when his son was to participate as the

audience-bride to his father-in-law character, a senior actor from EKTA decided that he

wouldnotbeabletoplayhisroleinfrontofsomeonewhowasbiologicallyrelatedtohim.

Couchedinstatementsthatalludedtoanauthoritativefather-sonrelationship,theactor–

twominutes before the performance began – interchanged roleswith a less experienced

andyoungeractorwhohada supporting role in theplayand refused toactalongsidehis

son. Now,while such personal/professional boundaries are often areas for conflict in the

theatre,what set this instance apartwas the fact that I, as the director, did not find out

about this exchange of roles and professional-personal blurring until after the show was

over.Giventhat Iwasnotprivy to theshow itself, itwasnotuntil theaudiencemembers

hadleftthatIlearnedabouttheshowdownthathadhappenedbackstage.

Frustrationsandother immediatereactionsaside, thismix-upbecamepoignantbecause it

forcedthismainlandIndianoutsiderwhowasdirectingtheworkshopandwasinapowerful

position in a context that was frustrated with Indian power-holders, to be completely

vulnerable and powerless. While a more conventional play would have given me, an

37AversionofthissectionhasappearedinDelusionsofsingularity:Aesthetics,discomfortandbewildermentinKashmir(Dinesh,2015a).However,extensivechangeshavebeenmadetothepublishedwriting.

64

opportunitytoseeactors’responsesbeforetheshowandattempttoproblemsolve;or in

theworstcasescenario,tostoptheshowmidwayifthereweretobeaseriousglitchlikethe

onedescribedabove,theImmersiveTheatreformandthepoweritgavetheactors(overthe

director)didnotallowmetodoeitherof those things; Iwasnotevenaspectator. James

Thompson (2005:10-11) provides an interesting point of consideration herewhenhe says

that:“Hostsprovideawelcomethatmightonthesurfaceappearunconditional,buttheyare

also extremely aware of the power dynamics evident in the host/guest relationship”. In

dilutingthepowerthatIenjoyedinthecontext–asdirector,asguest,andasa‘mainland’

Indian – the use of Immersive and Documentary Theatre inCages seemed to present an

ethicallyandpedagogicallynuancedaestheticstrategy.

Ethics,Aesthetics,Pedagogy&theSpectator-participant

Theimmersiveexperiencebeginsthemomentyoufirsthearaboutit(Machon,2013:23).

While the content of Cageswas something that was extremely familiar in the Kashmiri

context, the aesthetic choice to combine Documentary and Immersive Theatre strategies

wasnovelfortheEKTAartistsandthetwenty-twoaudienceparticipants.Thecompositionof

thethreeframeworks inCagesseemedtocreateastrongsenseofbewildermentamongst

its spectators by becoming “an activity with new physical and emotional demands” that

containedthepotentialto“dislocatebodiesanddisruptaccustomedpatternsofbehaviour”

andbycraftingaprocessthatresonatedwith“thefamiliarbyrecreatingforgottenactionsor

websofunderstanding”(Thompson,2003:23-24).Sincethespectatorswereverymuchthe

protagonistsofCages,andweretheoneswhopossiblyfacedthemostamountofdisruption

in “accustomed patterns of behaviour”, audience members in this case, might more

appropriately be referred to as spectator-participants. While there aremany illuminating

momentswhenconsideringthespectator-participants,thefirstpointofdiscussionarisesin

the invitationformalespectator-participantstoembodywomen.bellhooks (1992:146), in

talkingabout the filmParis isBurning,puts forward the idea that“theexperienceofmen

dressingaswomen”hasalwaysbeenconsidered“bythedominantheterosexistculturalgaze

as a sign that one is symbolically crossing over from a realm of power into a realm of

powerlessness”.Therefore,given thepatriarchies thatgovernmuchofmainland Indiaand

Kashmir,“tochoosetoappearas ‘female’whenone is ‘male’ isalwaysconstructed in the

65

patriarchalmind-setasaloss,asachoiceworthyonlyofridicule”(hooks,1992:146).Given

thispossibilityofridicule/shameforourspectator-participantsamidstculturalconstructions

ofmasculinityinKashmir,EKTAandIhadtomitigatetherisksofanypotentialbacklashfor

the Company by ensuring that only “open-minded”38 people were invited to the

performanceandasaresult,thechoiceofwhotoinvitetoparticipateinthescenarioswas

left entirely tomembersof EKTA. In addition tomale spectator-participants’ hesitation to

takingonfemaleroles,Iunderstoodtheartists’useofthetermopen-mindedtorefertothe

larger risks of performing theatre in Kashmir – where some consider the art form to be

against an Islamic code of conduct. Since even a ‘conventional’, proscenium performance

couldberisky inKashmir;anexperimentalworksuchasCagescontainedthepossibilityof

becoming dangerous. Hence EKTA members’ desire to ensure that Cages’ spectator-

participantswouldbeindividualswhowereknownasbeingopentotheatricalundertakings.

Thespectator-participantsweredressedasbridesintwoparallelstorylinesthatoccurredin

the performance, scenarios that occurred simultaneously but were executed by different

actors whose scenes sometimes intersected. The two spectator-participants who entered

togetherthuswentontwoseparatejourneys,onlycomingtogetheragainattheendofthe

experience. Both were involved in their own bride price negotiations, had to perform

household chores at the behest of their in-laws, and never saw their husbands – in one

scenariothebridecomestodiscoverthatherhusbandhasbeenabductedandrelocatedby

theIndianArmedForcesundersuspiciouscircumstances;intheother,thewifeisinformed

thatherhusbandhad joinedamilitantgroupandwaskilledwhileattemptingtocrossthe

bordertoPakistan.Bothhusbandsareneverseenasaresultofdifferentmanifestationsof

the violence in Kashmir and the brides/spectator-participants come together at a prayer

ceremonycalledtheKhatamShariftomarktheendofthepieceinprayerforthepeaceof

theirhusband’ssouls.GiventhereligiosityoftheKashmiricontext,theritualoftheKhatam

Sharif also presented a moment of doubling: where actors and spectator-participants

engaged with the prayers both as themselves and as their characters. In addition to the

performance itself,wesoughttopreparethespectator-participantsforthisnovelmodeof

spectatorship through pre-show sessions that took the form of five to ten minute

information conversations and post-show discussions to help the spectator-participants

38 ThiswasthetermusedbymyEKTAcollaborators.

66

debrief. It was the post-show discussions that were particularly revealing and shall be

discussedfurtheroninthischapter.

Given that Cages was specifically designed for an audience of Kashmiri men to create

frameworks for thinking about the grey zones of relational violence in a context where

primary narratives of violence centre surround political affiliations, the familiar and

unfamiliar in thispiecewerecraftedwithadegreeofspecificity.Thisspecificity ledtothe

inhabitation of the space between explanation and incomprehensibility that Giorgio

Agamben (1999) calls for, and it was perhaps predictable then that when we had the

occasionalspectator-participantwhodidnotfitourspecificprofile–someonefromoutside

Kashmir or a female audiencemember – the affect that the piece created seemed to be

notably different. For instance, while the Kashmiri male spectators discussed the

unconventionalityoftheformandthewayinwhichtheirembodimentofawomanaffected

theirperceptionofanalltoofamiliarscenario,theaudiencememberfrom‘mainland’India

madespecificmentionthattherewasjusttoomuchnoveltyinthepiece.Assomeonewho

wasunfamiliarwithKashmiriweddingtraditionsandgenderrolesintheKashmirihousehold,

she found the combination of unfamiliar form and unfamiliar content to be

incomprehensible.Similarlythetwofemaleaudiencememberswhoexperiencedthepiece

had a different affective experience from the Kashmirimale spectator-participants. Being

Kashmiriwomenwho had a heightened sense of familiaritywith the content, embodying

what they alreadywerewas a doubling that seemednot to be novel enough; essentially,

they were playing themselves. As Judith Butler (2004:145-146) has said, “identification

always relies upon a difference that it seeks to overcome” and the premise for such an

identificationisthatthe“onewithwhomIidentifyisnotme,andthat‘notbeingme’isthe

condition of the identification”. Since the element of “not beingme”was absent for the

Kashmiriwomenaudiencemembers,Cagesseemedtorendertheirbeingoverpoweredby

theexperience–arelivingofthatwhichtheyalreadyknew.Oneofthewomenarticulated

Cages’impactonhermuchaftertheeventdemonstratingwhatThompson(2005:235)says

aboutaffectiveoutcomes, that“theycan linger”;where lingering“implies thataffectdoes

nothavetohappenatthemomentoftheperformancebutcaneitherbesustainedbeyond

itoroccuratadifferenttime”(Thompson,2005:331). Inthisspiritof lingering,afewdays

afterherparticipationinCages,thisfemalespectator-participantcommentedonaphotoof

67

herself playing the bride on Facebook (posted by her husband) and summed up her

experiencethus:

SabiyaRashid:“enactedaroleshowingtheagonyofagirl,whogetsmarriedbutnever

sawherhusbandasheisarrestedbyarmedforcesonthedayofmarriage,liveswiththefather-in-lawandeachcoming

daylooksforwardforherbelovedone,butonefinedaygetsaletteralongwiththedivorcepapers,scatteringallherdreams.

Itisnotastory,Ithinksomewheresomeoneislivingthislife ....”

Figure4:SabiyaRashid'scommentsonFacebook,inresponsetoherparticipationinCages.(PhotoCourtesy:AjazRashid)

Despite multiple instances of such lingering affects where audience members to Cages

referredbacktotheirspectatorialexperience, itbecameimportantformetograpplewith

thechallengesthatthiscombinationofImmersiveandDocumentaryTheatrespresentedfor

itsspectator-participants.

The anxiety that immersive forms can evoke has beenmentioned by Nicola Shaughnessy

(2012),whodraws fromLynGardner (2009) toarticulate concernsabout theethics, risks,

and anxiety of such immersive forms. It is worth quoting extensively from Shaughnessy

(2012:192)here:

Theatre is changing so rapidly that many of the old conventions are going out thewindow.Theremaynotbeanyseats.Youmaynotknowquitewheretostand.Theremaynotbeanyotherspectators-or, indeed,anyactors.Youmaydiscoverthatyouaretheshow, which raises questions about exactly who is taking the risk and who should bepaying...Anxiety kills theatre...The makers of immersive and interactive theatreexperienceswhoarecreatingworkthatisexploringnewwaysofengagingwithaudiencesareincompletelynewterritory,bothphysicallyandmentally.Theyaregoingtohavetofind ways to create experiences for their audiences where risks can be taken withoutcausingaudienceanxietytorocket.

Cognisance of the anxiety-inducing qualities in a performance like Cages therefore,

necessitatedamorenuancedmeditationon thenotionofnovelty.While thisprojectwas

initiallydesignedwithaninsufficientlyproblematisedunderstandingofnovelty,theanxiety

provoked by the unfamiliar in Cages led me to consider, carefully, what Daniel Berlyne

(1960:64)hassuggested:thatunfamiliarpractices“donotachievemaximumstrengthwitha

68

maximum of novelty”, but rather, with "an intermediate level of novelty". By using the

novelty of the Immersive Theatre form in Kashmir so as to heighten affect, Cages had

possibly erred on the side of “maximum novelty” whereas a more intermediate novelty

mighthavebeenfarmoreethicallyandpedagogicallysound.

While EKTA creators and I had thought about tackling the discomfort of spectator-

participants with the immersive experience through the intentional creation of pre- and

post-performance discussions, this strategy seemed insufficient in the situation itself. The

two spectator-participants to each performance were requested to arrive half an hour

beforeCagesinordertofamiliarisethemselveswiththelargerobjectivesofthepieceandto

informthemabouttheparticipatoryqualityofthework.39Theseconversationsbefore/after

each performance were conducted with the aim of easing audiences in and out of an

embodied spectatorship that could potentially cause anxiety. However, these informal

conversations ultimately seemed insufficient to reduce anxiety for a public that had very

littleaccess to theatrical literacyand thus, fewtoolswithwhich todecodeaperformance

event like Cages. Therefore while the pre and post-performance conversations with

spectator-participants became immensely insightful for us, the creators, it soon emerged

that ‘more’wouldneedtobedone. Itwas inquestioningofwhat this ‘more’mightmean

thattheideaforaprocess-basedspectatorshipcameabout;anideathatwentontobecome

one of the primary outcomes of this project and one that shall be returned to at various

pointsinthisthesis.

Thesecondstrategythatwasusedtoreducetheiranxiety,whichwasmoresuccessful,layin

the character of the bride’s brother. This character was designed to function as a caring

guideintotheworldofCages,incontrasttoimmersiveexperienceslikeCheminsandThisis

CampX-Raythatuseauthoritarianguidesthatemployfeartoensureaudienceparticipation.

In Chemins, for example, actors who play menacing immigration officers demand the

participationofaudience inthepiece. Infact,audiencememberswhodonot listentothe

instructions of these officers, are threatened with expulsion from the performance

(Haedicke, 2002:106); an expulsion that occurs at the very beginning of Chemins to one

39The EKTA director and actors invited people they knew, who were less likely to be ‘offended’ in embodying a woman, to Cages.Invitations were subsequently made by telephone/email and the spectator-participants were informed that there would be audienceparticipationrequiredintheperformances.However,itcametolightduringthepre-performancediscussionsthatthisinformationhadnotbeenwellunderstoodbymanyofthespectators.

69

audiencemember–possiblyanactorwhowasplacedintheaudience--soastoinducefear

intheotheraudiencemembersabouttherealconsequencesfortheirlackofparticipation.

Regardlessofwhetherornot this first instancewas staged inChemins, theuseof fear to

inspireaudienceparticipationinImmersiveTheatrewascarefullyquestionedintheKashmiri

context.GiventhenatureoftheconflictsandthewaysinwhichKashmirishavetodealwith

various aggressions on a daily basis, using fear to invokeparticipationwasnot something

thatwasdesired.Itwaspreciselyforthisreasonthen,thatthecharacterofthebrotherwas

createdtowardsusingamorecaringwaysofinvitingthespectator-participantstoimmerse

themselves in Cages. As Table 4 describes, the actors performing the role of the brides’

brother,established–orrather,soughttoestablish—afraternalandcaringwayto involve

theaudiencemembersinthepiece.Thatsaid,itcannotbediscountedthateven‘care’can

have aggressive qualities and the brother character inCageswas certainly insistent in his

embodiment of affection. In addition, the actor playing the brother also knew that if a

spectator-participantwasparticularlydifficult and/or refused toparticipate, s/he couldbe

askedto leavetheperformancewiththebrothersayingsomething like:“Icanseeyouare

determinedtoberebelliousandcastaspersionsonourfamilyname,Shazia,somaybeyou

should justgo”.Thereforealthoughthebrotherwasdesignedtobeacaringcharacter,he

didhaveimmensecontroloverthesituation,acontrolthatwasunavailabletothespectator-

participant.

Athought-provokingperspectiveonwhy/howCagesprovokedanxietycamefromaColonel

in the IndianArmedForces,whowasoneof theperformancespectator-participants– the

Colonelisthespectator-participantfromoutsideKashmirwhowasreferencedearlierinthis

chapter.Initiallyacontactthathadbeenmadeaspartofthefuturephasesofthisdoctoral

collaboration with the Indian Armed Forces, the Colonel’s participation in Cages was

noteworthyforanumberofreasons.Whilesomeofthesereasonswillbeanalysedfurtherin

Chapter Four, in the context of Cages the Colonel’s presence was particularly significant

becauseitwasthefirsttimethatEKTAhadhostedanarmyofficialontheirpremises.Both

sideswereawareoftherisksvis-à-vissecurityandpublicopinionandtherefore,theColonel

arrivedinanunmarkedjeepanddressedinplainclothes.Asanticipated,giventhespecificity

with which Cages had been created for a target audience of Kashmiri men, the Colonel

highlighted the overwhelming sense of novelty in the piece, both in form and content.

70

Additionally however, in the post-performance debrief, the Colonel expressed his

reservations that therehadbeenno solutionsoralternativesproposed.Hearticulatedhis

discomfortwiththe‘victim’narrativethatheinterpretedCagesasperpetuatingnotionsof

Kashmiri women, alluding to the possibility that this performance ofwhat is rather than

whatmightbelayatthecruxoftheanxietyproducedbytheexperience.

This critique from theColonelmight benefit consideration through social cognitive theory

which “is based on the assumption that one of the things that influences learning and

forming positions” is observing if a particular receives “positive or negative rewards”

(Gesser-Edelsburg, 2011:73). The Colonel seemed to be looking for, in Cages, the

presentation of a behavioural model that would present Kashmiriwomen as beingmore

than‘victim’,ofbeingagentsintheirownlives.Thelimitationsofnotpresentingmodelsin

thetheatrehasbeendiscussedbyAnatGesser-Edelburg (2011:73)who, inspeakingabout

dramaticrepresentationsofIsrael-Palestinesays,“[…]theatrecreatorsshowedtheattitude

ofIsraelisoldierstowardsthePalestinianpopulationintheoccupiedterritoriesinanegative

light, but did not show the audience positive models or characters that undergo

transformations to more tolerant positions”. Similarly, Cages showed the subjugated

positionsofmanyKashmiriwomenwithoutpresentingmodelsorcharactersthatunderwent

transformations to less victimisedpositions. Thepost-showdiscussion after this particular

performance therefore led toaheateddebatebetweentheColonel, thesecondspectator

whowatchedtheshowthatday,andthedirectorofEKTA–eachofwhomhadadifferent

opinionastowhetherornotapositivemodelwasnecessaryinthepiece.40

AnotherinterestingresponsetoCagesemergedfromaKashmirijournalistwhocametoone

of the first performances. In the initial shows – the script evolved each day based on

suggestionsfromaudiencemembers–oneoftheabsenthusbandsischaracterisedashaving

beenkilledontheborderbetweenIndiaandPakistan,thusestablishingtothosewithlocal

knowledge that he was involved in the militancy. In the parallel scenario, the absent

husband sendsa letter to thebride/spectator-participant saying thathehad foundanew

wife and would not be returning home – not specifying, in the letter, how he had left

Kashmir in the first place. Given this ambiguity, this journalist spectator-participant

40Despitetheconversationendingwithallpartiesagreeingtodisagree,theColonelinvitedEKTAtoperformoneoftheirshowsafewmonthslaterattheBadamibaghCantonment–themainbaseoftheArmedForcesinSrinagar(thisisfurtheranalysedinChapterFour).

71

interpretedboth scenarios inCages#2and#3 as implicatingKashmirimilitantsandasked

meinourpost-showdebriefiftheperformancewastryingtoplacemoreblameonKashmiri

militantsascomparedtotheIndianArmedForces.Whileourinitialaimhadbeentofocuson

theexperiencesofwomenandnotfocusonwhowastoblameforthewomen’ssubjugation,

this response revealed that in a context like Kashmir, it is impossible for attributions of

blame to remain unspoken. Returning to earlier mentions in discussions around the

performative components to political affiliations, the use of detail in one scenario when

counteredbyambiguityintheotherwasseenasperformingananti-militant(andpro-India)

agenda.Therefore,theletterinthemoreambiguousscenariohadtobeextensivelyedited

soastoplaceblameontheArmedForcesandthusbalancetheimplicationofthemilitancy

intheparallelframework.

Whilethisclarificationinthelettereventuallyaddressedquestionsofblame,thejournalist

insisted on an interviewwithme after the show and asked, in variousways, “Why don’t

IndianartistscareaboutKashmir?”Putinanextremelytenuoussituationofnotwantingto

answersuchavague,accusatoryquestionwhilerealisingthesensitivenatureofwhatIwas

being asked, the conversation became tense in a matter of minutes; a discomfort that

broughtbackthesloganIhadseenonmanyaKashmiriwall(‘IndianDogsGoBack’)andre-

openedethicalquestionsaroundtherelevanceofthisprojectinacontextsuchasKashmir.

While discussionswith EKTA about a longer-termpartnership on thedoctoral project had

begunmuchbeforetheconversationwiththisjournalist,thisparticularincidentreaffirmed

mydecisionthatitwouldbeintegralforthefollowingstagesoftheworktobringonboard

strong, local partners - partners who would be willing to experiment with the aesthetic

componentsoftheproject,whileawareofthepotential(andrisks)totheatricalpracticein

the grey zones of Kashmir. It was the conversation with this journalist therefore, that

cemented my resolve to continue working with EKTA in the subsequent phases of the

project,althoughtheinitialideahadbeentoworkwiththetheatrecompanyonlyintheCivil

Society component of this work: another instance where situational ethics informed a

changeinapproach,inresponsetothatwhichemergedthroughpractice.

72

Ethics,Aesthetics,Pedagogy&theFacilitator-director

TheworkshopsandperformancesofCagesalsoresultedinmanyautoethnographicinsights

forme: the first having to dowith the performativity of religion.While age, gender, and

nationality were embodiments and performances that I had to carefully negotiate in the

workwithEKTA, agnosticismduringa timeofRamadan inKashmirwasperhaps themost

significant component to theperformativityof identities in this three-weekperiod.Actors

whowakeupatthreeinthemorningtoeat--becausetheycannotimbibeanyfood,drink,

oranyothersubstancetillsunset--makeforeasilytiredandmoodycollaborators;especially

when the person conducting the workshop is not fasting herself. Ramadan played a

significantroleinthedynamicsofthisworkshop:intheeasewithwhichtempersrosetothe

surface;intheconstantillnessesthatactorswereaffectedbyduetodehydration,hunger,or

exhaustion;intherehearsal/performanceschedulesthathadtobeentirelybasedontimes

forprayer.Thesecondimportantinsightwasadebunkingofmyassumptionthattheproject

withEKTAwouldonlybepartoftheCivilSocietyfocusinthelargerdoctoralundertakingof

alsoinvokingnarrativesfrom/with/aboutMilitants/Ex-MilitantsandtheIndianArmedForces

in Kashmir. The practices involved in the creation and performances of Cages quickly

revealedthatsomeofmycollaborators inEKTAwereex-militantsthemselves; thustwoof

theidentity-basedgroupsthatIhadinitiallyassumedasbeingmutuallyexclusive,beganto

overlap. The performativity of religious/militancy-based identities was only furthered by

considerationsofgender.

In addressing the role of women in Palestinian theatre, Jamal Abu-Ghosheh (in Nassar,

2006:23)says,“theabsenceofwomenonthePalestinianstagemakes ithardtochallenge

the stereotypes and the traditional images of women”. Similarly, various social, religious,

andculturalexpectationsofKashmiriwomen leads to theconsequencethat“womenwho

wanttowork intheatrehavetobea ‘bitopenand liberal’” (Nassar,2006:23). InKashmir,

womenwhowanttoparticipate intheatrehavetobecome“initiatorsandrolemodels for

otherwomen”(Nassar,2006:23)andgiventhe(in)tangiblepressuresofparticipatinginthe

theatre under such circumstances, many women performers drop out. Reflecting on

questions of gender, EKTA’s director has often mentioned the company’s problems with

recruitingwomensayingthatsingle,youngwomenwhojointheCompanyarelikelytodrop

out because of the way they are subsequently viewed by family, friends, and society in

73

general. Parents of young women actors are reluctant to let their daughters go out to

rehearsals at night, to travel outside Kashmir, and to take part in an activity where they

wouldbeminglingwithmen;on theotherhand,marriedwomen, theEKTAdirector said,

werejustaslikelytodropoutbecauseofhouseholdchoresanddisapprovinghusbands/in-

laws.Becauseof these societalpressuresand implications, thedirectorof EKTAoftenhas

hadtoadoptamore‘heavyhanded’approachinhowinter-genderrelationshipsmanifestin

therehearsalroomandtheironyofcreatingapiecelikeCagesatEKTAcannotbeignored.

BANG.Theofficedoorisslammedshut,locked.TheperformanceissettobegininfiveminutesandIgotoknockonthe door – one of the actresses has been called into the office for meeting, I’m told. I stop myself fromknockingbecauseloudvoicesemerge.Uncle’sandhers.BANGBANGIknock.Thevoicescontinuebutthedoorisnotopenedforme.“She’llbehereinaminute”,Unclesays.BANGBANGBANGMythirdattemptismoresuccessfulandUncleopensthedoor,theactresscomesoutlookingshakenupandCages gets ready to be performed for its fifth time. “Our neighbours saw her sitting outside on the stairsyesterday”,Unclesaid,“Shewastalkingtooneoftheboys;oneofthemaleactors….ThisisKashmir,youknow.Theyseeher,theytalk,wewillnevergetothergirlstobepartofEKTA.Weneedtobecareful.”<Silence>WehaveaconversationlikethisandthenperformapiecelikeCagesthatcritiquesthedifferentstandardsthatareatplayforwomeninKashmir.Wehaveaconversationlikethis,andgobacktospeakinginpreandpostperformancechatsabouthowthingsmightneedtochangeforwomenintheregion.Wehaveaconversationlikethis,theactressgoesout,getsintothemanufacturedchickencoop,andgetsreadytobeginhernextperformance.Sheperformsbrilliantly,asalways;buttoday,insteadofstayingbehindtochatwithhercolleaguesaftertheshow,sheleaves.Immediately.WehavethisconversationandtherewillbenoconversationsbetweenyoungmenandwomenonthestairsofEKTAtoday.Theneighbourswillhavenothingtosay.

Auto-ethnographicExcerpt2

Outcomes

Long after Cages, in a conversation with the director of EKTA, I was told that the actors

mighthavechosentoworkwiththetopicof‘Women’amidstalltheothertopicsthatwere

proposed (indicated in Table 1), because it was the least controversial. EKTA’s director

74

suggested that talking about the “pain of a woman”41 and her status as ‘victim’ are

unquestionable in Kashmir, whereas talking about the stone-pelters for example, would

havebeenmuchmorecontroversial.ItisalsopossiblethatEKTAmemberschosethetheme

of ‘Women’ because there was an implicit assumption that this particular theme would

interestme–despitemyeffortsnottobiasthechoiceofsubjectinanyway.Ineithercase,

thenuancesofthischoiceofciviliannarrativeisinterestingtoanalyse,sinceitpresentsthe

possibilityofdecipheringwhichCivil Societynarratives inKashmirare seenasbeingmore

acceptable;aconsiderationthatwasheightenedmorepoignantly inthenextphaseof the

researchwithMilitants/Ex-Militants.

Apart from the acceptability of narratives, the process of Cages contained interesting

revelationsabout thegrey zonesof civilianexperience inKashmir.While theoverlapwith

Civil Societyand theuseof violence (throughprotest and themilitancy)hasalreadybeen

mentionedearlierinthischapter,Cagesrevealedapossibleapproachtothegreyzonethat

is rooted in thenotionof “relational” violence.A concept that Foster,Haupt, andDeBeer

(2005:66)putforwardinTheatreofViolence,relationalviolencespeakstotheunderstanding

thateveninlargersituationsofconflict,otheractsofviolenceexistthataresubsumedunder

themoredominantnarrativesofthecontext.InKashmirthen,sincedominantnarrativesof

victimhood and perpetration revolve around political affiliations about whether Kashmir

should be an independent nation state, part of India, or part of Pakistan, Cages’way of

tackling gendered relationships drew attention to such a relational understanding of

violence.Forinstance,aKashmiricivilianwhoisharassedbyanIndianArmedForcesofficer

iscertainlya‘victim’;however,whenthesamemangoeshomeandpromotespatriarchyin

problematicways,hebecomesarelational‘perpetrator’.Approachingrelationalviolencein

a time/place of war therefore, seems to be where the grey zones of Civil Society might

manifest.

Inadditiontotheselargeroutcomesvis-à-visthecontext,theaestheticformofCagesthat

combined Immersive and Documentary Theatre presentedmultiple lenses through which

affectwasproblematised.Whilesomeofthemalespectator-participantslefttheexperience

intearsandonespectatorclaimedthathewouldreturnhomeandaskhiswifehowshehad

felt on their wedding day -- thus alluding to possible “lingering” affects (Thompson,

41 AnexpressionusedbyEKTAmembersandspectator-participantstoCages.

75

2009:157) -- it was the reaction of the two women, the Colonel, and the journalist that

revealedthelimitationsoftheaestheticofthepiece.InpieceslikeChemins,ThisisCampX-

Ray,andCages,thereisaveryobviousattempttografttheidentityofthemoreoppressed

Otherontothebodyofthespectator-participantwho is (relationally)moreprivileged.The

visible risks in this type of embodiment therefore, lie in the creation of an essentialised

narrative; one in which the more oppressed Other is seen as being an all-encompassing

‘victim’ who somehow needs the awareness of the privileged Other to alleviate their

(relative) subjugation. By painting a ‘victimised’ image of women in Kashmir then, Cages

mightbecritiqued– like theColoneldid– fornothavinggiven sufficientattention to the

many ways in which Kashmiri women do resist and subvert hegemonic constructs of

womanhood (as in the case of APDP women); of not providing any positive models of

behaviour. Cages then, problematically, fell into Chandra Mohanty’s (1988) critique of

‘Western’ impositionsof feminism in ‘post-colonial’contexts; reiteratingthenarrativeofa

woman who is less vocal and visible in public spheres being necessarily a ‘victim’ to

patriarchyinallfacetsofherlife.Ultimately,whileCagestalkedaboutrelationalviolenceas

framedbygenderwithinthedominantnarrativesofKashmir,theperformancedidnotpay

sufficient attention to the grey zones within the idea of women’s agency in Kashmir.

Therefore,whileIstillremainintriguedbythepotentialCagesdemonstratedinworkingwith

a “relational”approach toviolenceandconsideringadifferentkindof inequality than the

onesthattendtodominatenarrativesabouttheconflictsinKashmir,Iamforcedtowonder,

fromtheanomalousreactionsof theColonel, thetwowomen,andthe journalist, to think

about ‘balance’ during theatrical interventions in times/places ofwar. ‘Balance’ not being

simplyaboutanequalnumberof‘victim’and‘perpetrator’narrativesinthetheatricalpiece,

but balance in terms of nuancing a homogenously identified Civil Society group like

‘Women’.Thisquestionofbalanceisreturnedtointheconcludingchapterofthisthesis.

Asaresult,Cageshaspromptedmetothinkaboutthecomplexitiesoftwoideas:affectand

spectatorship.WhiletheinitialstagesoftheprojecthadunproblematicallyacceptedJames

Thompson’sargument foraffectasapointofdeparture,Cagespromptedaquestioningof

what different kinds of affectsmanifestwhen theatre is practiced in times/places ofwar.

Affect, as itmanifested for the spectator-participantsofCages,was starkly different from

theaffectiveoutcomesfortheEKTAcreators,which inturnwasdifferentfromthatofthe

76

affective qualities of my auto-ethnographic insights. In addition, the responses from the

journalist spectator-participant suggested that while this research could ‘get away with’

affectiveobjectiveswhentalkingaboutatopiclike‘Women’,thatwasagenerallyacceptable

narrativeofvictimhood inKashmir,wouldaffectbeasufficientexplanationwhenworking

withthemorecontentiousvoicesof‘perpetrators’likeMilitants/Ex-militantsandtheArmed

Forces?Relatedtothisquestion,anotherimportantoutcomefromthisphaseoftheproject

was theemergenceofa considerationaround ‘process-basedspectatorship’. For instance,

when the concepts guiding the ideas of aesthetics, pedagogy, and ethics in this research

were initially considered, pedagogy was seen primarily as a framework affecting my co-

creators in Kashmir; the spectator experiencewas seen as being farmore closely tied to

ethical and aesthetic considerations. However, given that pre- and post-performance

discussions for the spectator-participants seemed insufficient in reducing anxiety and/or

framingmyintentions,Ibegantoconsiderwhatitmightmeanforspectatorstobetrainedin

thesamewayasactors.Forinstance,whatifthespectator-participantshadhadtodosome

basictheatreexercisesinrole-playpriortotheirimmersionintheperformance?Couldrole-

play and basic improvisation exercises have given the spectator-participants better tools

with which to decode scenarios? Should I have added, to these theatrical skill-building

sessionsforspectator-participants,amoreconsideredarticulationofthegoalsoftheproject

instead of sharing Cages as a stand-alone performance? While these questions pointed

towardanextremelyinterestingpossibilityforthisproject’scontributiontonewknowledge,

did process-based spectatorship seem necessary forCagesbecause of its use of extreme

novelty in aesthetic form?What if the next project were to use intermediate novelty --

would process-based spectatorship still seem relevant? Therefore, the idea of a process-

basedspectatorshipneededtofirstbecheckedagainstthenotionofnoveltyi.e.,diditseem

toholdpotentialbecauseof thenovel content fromKashmir’sgreyzones,ordidprocess-

basedspectatorshipemergeasrelevanttoCagesbecauseoftheexcessivenoveltyintheuse

oftheImmersiveandDocumentaryTheatreforms?Withtheseoutcomesinmind,thenext

phaseofthepracticeinKashmirinvolvedameditationonthefollowingquestions:

• WhatarethegreyzonesofMilitant/Ex-MilitantnarrativesinKashmir?

• Wouldaffectbeasufficientframingforworkthatdealswith‘perpetrator’narratives

ofMilitants/Ex-Militants?

77

• Wouldprocess-based spectatorship still seemnecessary if theworkmoved toward

an intermediate rather thanextremeuseofnovelty in theaestheticsof Immersive

andDocumentaryTheatre?

78

CHAPTERTHREE:STORIES,WORDS,&EX/MILITANTS

Research work with victims might be easier to undertake both methodologically andmorally; after all, these are the peoplewho suffered. But this research route also facessomemoraldilemmas.Ifthereiscompletesilenceaboutperpetrators,itassistsinkeepingtheirviolence‘outofpublicrecordandsocialconsciousness’(Huggins,Haritos-Fatouros&ZimbardoinFoster,HauptandDeBeer,2005:91).

InthisChapter,theterm‘perpetrator’isgenerallyseenasbeingapplicabletoMilitants/Ex-

militants42 or members of the Indian government’s Armed Forces; an observation that

emergedduringpre-doctoraltripstoJ&Kandwasimportantintheconceptualisationofthis

project.However,althoughtheterm‘perpetrator’hasbeenusedonoccasioninthiswriting,

it is important to clarify that the term has been employed only if/when particular

authors/creatorshaveuseditintheirscholarship.WhenIputforwardmyownnotionsand

observations,careistakennottousethistermandalternativevocabularylikeMilitants,Ex-

militants, or expressions such as ‘thosewhouse/haveused violence’ are used in place of

‘perpetrator’. This linguistic choice is conscious, so as to dilute the accusatory tone that

usually underscores the use of the term ‘perpetrator’ and to highlight instead, the

problematicgreyzonesinthisresearchthegoalofwhichistocreatetheatrewithorabout

thosewhouse/haveusedviolenceinKashmir.Fromthepoliticsandethicsofterminologyto

the implementation of practical strategies in theatre workshops and performances

therefore,thereweremultiplestepsthatwentintoplanningthepracticalcomponenttothis

phaseintheresearch;beginningwithaninvestigationintoexistingscholarshipthatexplores

questionssurroundingthosewhouse/haveusedviolence.

HannahArendt’s(1963)EichmanninJerusalemisoneoftheseminaltextsincontemporary

philosophytoconsiderhowordinarypeoplecometocommitextraordinaryactsofviolence.

Arendt’s thesis suggests that agents of violence are often nondescript and not the

sensationalperformerswhoaredescribedbycontemporarymediadiscoursesaroundterror

and terrorism. Since Arendt’s postulation around the “banality” of evil, “it is not only

Holocauststudiesthathavealludedto[her]thesis;anumberofrecentstudiesoftorturers

fromvariousplaceshaveemphasisedtheordinarinessofthosetheystudied”(Foster,Haupt

&DeBeer,2005:56).Furthermore,aftertheactsofviolencewerecommittedorwhenwars

42 WhereEx-militantsiscapitalised,Iusethetermtorefertoagroupofpeoplesoidentified.Wherethetermisnotcapitalised(i.e.,ex-militants), I use the term to refer to specific individuals fromwithin the larger group; individualswhowere in direct contactwith thisresearcheratdifferentpointsinthework.

79

haveended, littleevidencewasfound“apartfromamediumrangeof ‘burnout’,thatsuch

peoplewereoutoftheordinary”(Foster,Haupt&DeBeer,2005:56).Ithasbeenpostulated

that ‘perpetrators’oftengobacktoextremelyordinary livesand“thesestudiesarguethat

ordinarypeoplearetransformedbyparticularpracticesintheirroutineworkenvironments

into killers and murderers – they are not dispositionally predisposed towards violence”

(Foster,Haupt&DeBeer,2005:56).Drawingacomparisonbetweendominantmediaimages

ofthosewhocommitviolenceandacademicportrayalsofsimilargroups,Foster,Haupt&De

Beer (2005:321) say that while “the dominantmedia stereotype portrays perpetrators as

monsters…thedominantacademicimageistheopposite.Itpaintsthemasordinarypeople

(gender ignored, but assumed as male) diligently under sway of modern bureaucratic

compartmentalisation (the banality of evil thesis), or as obedient to authority and

conforming to social pressures (the situationist thesis)”. So what is the grey zone in this

conversationaboutapproachingnarrativesof thosewhouse/haveusedviolence?What is

thespacein-betweenromanticising/demonisingthosewhocommitviolenceandrelegating

theiractstotherealmoftheordinary/thebanal?

Oneapproachtodealingwiththesequestionshasbeentosuggestthatitisindividualsthat

have been victims of systematised oppression who become perpetrators of violence

themselves.Howevergiventhatitisextremely“difficulttomeasureoppression”and“since

the impact of oppression may be felt subjectively to greater or lesser degrees by

individuals,”perhapsitisnotactualoppressionbutrather“perceivedoppression[that]may

be the proper cognitive-emotional variable to examine as a potential risk factor for

terrorism”(Victoroff,2005:20).Evensuchaconsiderationof“perceivedoppression”comes

withvariouscaveatshowever,sinceasA.P.Silke(inVictoroff,2005:21)putsforth,"Veryfew

individuals of aggrieved minorities go on to become active terrorists. The question has

always been,why did these particular individuals engage in terrorismwhenmost of their

compatriots did not?" Looking at acts of perpetration solely as a response to a past

victimisation thus limits a thesis because of the inherent relativism in such a generalised

viewofthosewhocommitviolence.Thelimitationtothisthesisthatlinkspastvictimisation

and an individual’s propensity to use violence is further countered by the idea that

“terrorismisassociatedwiththetraitofnoveltyseeking”andsinceplanningandexecuting

suchactivitiesmightprovidea “thrilling actionoutside the realmofordinaryexperience”,

80

certain“theoristshaveopinedthatpoliticalviolencemaysatisfyinnate,perhapsgenetically

determinedneedsforhigh-levelstimulation,risk,andcatharsis"(Victoroff,2005:28).While

it has been suggested that young adolescents are more pliable thus, open to being

conditionedtoviolence–certainlysomethingthatcanbeseeninthediscussionsaroundthe

recruitment of child-soldiers– later in life as Bernard Saper (in Victoroff, 2005:28) puts it,

"once belief systems, resentments and desperate response tendencies are rigidly instilled

they are virtually impossible tomodify belatedly". Consequently, thematurity that comes

from life experience has been seen by thosewho conversewith “retired terrorists [who]

have revealed a mellowing of attitude, consistent with the theory that enthusiasm for

terrorist action is primarily a developmental phenomenon of late adolescence and early

adulthood”(Victoroff,2005:28).

Althoughthe initialgoalofthisprojectwastoreachouttoactivemilitants inKashmirand

investigatethespaces/potential/limitationsthatmightexistfortheatrewiththosewhoare

currentlyperpetratingactsofviolence,Isoonhadtocontendwiththeunpredictablenature

ofthisterrain.AsJamesThompson(2005:144)saysfromhisexperiencesofmakingtheatre

intimes/placesofwar,“mappingsafetyiscrucialforananalysisoftheplaceofperformance

inplaceofwar”and“whentheriskisunmappablebecauseitispalpable,thenthatspacefor

performanceisdestroyed”.Sincetheriskofworkingwithactivemilitantswas“unmappable”

and thus “palpable”, Iwas advised by various colleagues in Kashmir that themost logical

routewouldbetoworkwithKashmiriEx-militants(hencetheideaofthe“retiredterrorist”

highlighted earlier), either in the context of prisons or more informally within the broad

realmofthereintegrationoftheseindividualswithinCivilSociety.Sinceworkinginaprison

contextemergedashighlyproblematicsinceIwouldhaveonlybeengivenaccesstothose

individualsthatthegovernmentdeemedaccessible,thefinalmethodologicalchoicetoreach

out to Ex-Militantswasmade.While this narrowing downof collaborators to Ex-Militants

still stood the riskofbeingunmappable, it seemeda relatively lesspalpablestrategy than

contacting active militants and certainly more ethical than the government choosing

incarceratedmilitantvoicesforme.

In one of the few existing studies of the militant experience in Kashmir, Shobna Sonpar

(2008:147)presentsrelevantconclusionsfromherqualitativestudywith“24menwhohad

beeninvolvedinmilitancyandarenowincivilianlife(exceptforonewholaterreturnedto

81

militancy)”. In analysing why these individuals had initially joined the militancy, Sonpar

(2008:148) proposes that "poverty, lack of education and psychopathology” were not

significantfactors,whatwasrevealedashavingthemostrelevancewas“thesocio-cultural

context”. The individuals that Sonpar (2008:148) interviewed spoke of a “psychological

alienation”thathadoccurredforthemintheyearsprecedingthemilitancyandthatduetoa

pervasive “culture of fear and collective trauma”, there was a heightened awareness

amongst them of being both “Kashmiri and Muslim”. More than 50% of the individuals

Sonpar interviewed were younger than nineteen years of age when they joined the

militancy, making “developmental issues around identity, ego ideals and autonomy

psychologically salient”. Sonpar (2008:148-149) further elaborates thatwhile being in the

“socially idealized role of the mujahid or holy warrior enhanced self-worth”, there were

“varyingdegreesofdissociation”thatseemedtomarktheseindividuals’relationtoviolence

“aspotentialvictimandperpetrator”.Therespondentsspoketo“troublingfeelingsoffear,

doubt,guiltand loss,aswellasanawarenessofviolenceasamodeofpowerthatreadily

gets out of hand” (Sonpar, 2008:148-149).Of their return to civilian life, the respondents

spokeaboutthephysicalharassmentmetedouttothembytheIndianArmedForces,notto

mentionthepsychologicalstressofreturningtoa‘normal’life.Manyofthesesurrendered

militants that she interviewed also spoke to the long-term effects of interrogation and

torture, expressing anxiety about either never being able to marry or if married, being

unable to adequately provide for their families. “Socially, the respondents were in an

ambiguouspositionsincetheywere inneitherof the idealizedrolesofactivemilitant,nor

martyr”(Sonpar,2008:149),asentimentthatwaswidelycorroboratedintheinterviewsthat

ledtotheperformancecreatedaspartof thisresearchproject.This liminalitythatSonpar

alludes to – betweenmilitant andmartyr –was extremely significant in this phaseof the

project;anideathatwillbereturnedtointheconcludingsectionofthischapter.

Performance&theKashmiriMilitancy

Whileretiredterroristsandtheirvoicesformthecruxofthisphaseoftheresearch,weshall

nowtakeabriefdetourtothoseaspectsofthemilitancyinKashmirthatmightaugmentthis

theoretical consideration in being analysed as performances, or in being seen in

conversation with the larger notion of performance. Just as Chapter Two included a

82

meditationaroundhowcertainaspectstocivilianlifemightbenefitfrombeinglookedatas

performances, thischapterbrieflyconsiderssomestrategiesof theKashmirimilitancythat

might be similarly approached. It is imperative to clarify, again, that I do not seek to

ubiquitouslysubsumeaspectsoftheMilitant/Ex-militantexperienceunderthebroadgenre

ofperformance;sinceasRustomBharucha(inMackey&Fisher,2011:374)haspointedout,

“No discipline, I would argue, can assume such expertise without seriously reducing or

conflatingthesocio-politicalregistersofdifferentrealitiesandcontexts”.However,giventhe

seriousdearthofinformationwhenlookingtoaccessnarrativesofMilitantsandEx-militants

inKashmir, theconsiderationofcertainaspectsof theKashmirimilitancyasperformances

hasbeenintegraltomyownauto-ethnographicpositioninginthisphaseofthework.

As an existing example of such Performance Studies’ approach to acts of violence, Jenny

Hughes (2011) analyses the video of Ken Bigley’s (2004) beheading by presenting an

examination of how acts of ‘terrorism’might be readasperformances.Hughes (2011:37)

saysthat“thevideosdemonstratedmilitantIslam'sawarenessofthepowerofperformance

asaweaponofwar”byusingacarefularrangementof“set,propsandcostume” inthese

“scripted performances” which some have suggested that the militants “rehearsed by

decapitating chickens and sheep 'so as to appear professional' (Carroll 2005)”. Hughes

(2011:37) also points out that these videos targeted different audiences and draws from

journalistJasonBurkewhoarguesthat,“thistheatreofterrorwasintendedforanaudience

oftheMuslimworldinthestalls,theWestinthecheapseats”.AlthoughHughes’approach

revealssurprisingandinsightfulperspectivesabouttheuseofviolenceasinvokingstrategies

thatareusuallyassociatedwiththeatreandperformance,oneisforcedtoaskatwhatpoint

itisuseful/ethical/necessarytoconsidersuchacts,likeBigley’sbeheading,asperformances.

BringingperformanceintoconversationwiththeKashmirimilitancy,itissignificanttopoint

out that during the height of the militancy in Kashmir, in the 1990s, militant groups

specificallytargetedtheregion’sintellectualsandartists.KashmiriplaywrightM.L.Kemmuin

his 1994 play Dakh Yeli Tsalan, for instance, “critically portrays Kashmiri militants as

intolerant of the perpetuation of falsehoodswithin theatre, and as single-minded in their

violentpursuitofpoliticalfreedom”(Menon,2013:171).GiventhatcertainreadingsofIslam

aresaidtoconsideranytypeofpublicperformancetobeagainstthetenetsofthereligion,

thepersecutionofartistswas/isvalidatedbysomemilitantsinKashmirthroughthelensof

83

faith.ThismightbeseenintheparticularexampleoftheBhands,performersoftheKashmiri

folkformBhandPather,someofwho“wereactivelypersecuted,andevenkilledbymilitants

who objected to dance, music, and drama” (Menon, 2013:165-166). Therefore, not only

mightweseeasperformancestheactsofviolencethatarecommittedbyKashmirimilitants,

we also see how performances as aesthetic products are implicated in certain militant

beliefs.AlthoughIwasinitiallyunawareofanti-theatredimensionstomilitantideologiesin

Kashmir,therewereconcreteinstancesduringtheinterviewsandperformanceswherewe,

theartist-interviewers,cameupagainsttheideologicaloppositionstothetheatreofourex-

militant interviewees (prior/current) In response to suchoccurrences, the researchhad to

move beyond the as/is performance binary and discern what various factions in the

militancyinKashmiropineaboutperformanceasanartform.WhileinitialvisitstoKashmir

hadrevealedthattheperformativityofgenderwouldemergeinallphasesofthisproject–

see the previous chapter’s discussion on women performers in EKTA, for example -- the

explicit linkbetweenparticularKashmirimilitantideologiesandtheverynotionofcreating

theatre/performancewasaninsightthathadeludedme.

Withrespecttogender,whileChapterTwoconsidersthewaysinwhichtheperformativityof

gender in Kashmir influenced my own auto-ethnographic positioning, what is worthy of

discussionhereisthewayinwhichnarrativesofgenderareinvisibleindominantnarratives

surrounding the militancy in Kashmir. As will be apparent from the interviews and

performances thatare laterdescribed in thischapter, the ideaof ‘womanasmilitant’was

absent during the research. While the role of women in ‘softer’ roles of community

mobilisationwasmentionedmoreoften,Iwastoldinmyinterviewsleadingupandduringin

thisphaseoftheresearch,thatthereisonlyonefemaleex-militanttobefoundinKashmir

and that she was not in the region during my visit. And yet, there is archival material

availableinthepublicrealmthatcontradictswhatIwasoftentoldinKashmir.Forexample,

SwatiParashar’sworkonwomenandthemilitancyinKashmirwrites:

Idonotwanttoglorifythewomenbysayingthatweheldgunsandallthatbecausethiswillcreatetroubleforthewomenfolk,forthisreasononlyIdonotwanttosayanythingabout women holding guns. Otherwise, I used to have a gun under my bed there isnothinggreatabout it.Atthattimeevery localityusedtohave2to3militant(women)(Parashar,2011:298).

84

In lightofwhat ismentionedabove,CynthiaEnloe(2004:107)says,“culturalconstructions

ofmasculinity inmany societies have been dependent not simply on celebratingmen as

soldiers, but on simultaneously elevating women as mothers-of-soldiering-sons, valuing

womenchieflyfortheirmaternalsacrificesforthenation”.EchoingEnloe’sideas,ithasbeen

postulated that themilitancy inKashmirhasprimarilygiven rise to twokindsofgendered

responses: one that presentswomen as victims uponwhommilitants have imposed their

ideology (as we problematically represented in Cages); the second which speaks to the

involvement of Kashmiri women in the militancy but only within “the confines of their

acceptedgenderedroles—aswives,mothers,sisters,anddaughters”(Parashar,2011:302).

Archival research however, shows different dimensions to the roles that women took on

leadinguptoandduringthemilitancyinKashmirandsaysthatbeginningwiththe“theearly

Islamicperiodwomenparticipatedinarmedconflicteitherbyorganizingfoodandwaterand

taking care of thewounded or through playing a crucial part in the actual fightingwhen

needed”(Parashar,2011:296). Incontradictiontodominantnarrativesofwomen’sroles in

Islam, Parashar (2011:296) says that, “women in early Islam were politically vigilant to

ensure that the rulers were not deviating from established Islamic principles”. In

contemporaryKashmir,thefirstexampleoneseesoftheparticipationofwomeninamilitia

group is from1947,whenvariousgroupsofarmedvolunteersassisted the Indianarmy in

defendingSrinagarfromPakistaniaggression.“Astrikinginnovationduringthistimewasthe

women’smilitiainconservativeKashmirandseveralhundredarmedwomen(Hindus,Sikhs,

andMuslims)[who] joinedthemilitiaandreceivedarmstraining” (Parashar,2011:296),to

defend themselves and their homeswhenunder attack. As evidenced also by the picture

below, this heritage of women being trained as militia points toward the possibility that

women’s active (violent) participation in the militancy since the 1990s might not be “a

radical rupture from the past but an extension of role and responsibilities they had

demonstratedinotherviolentsituationsinthepast”(Parashar,2011:297).

85

Figure5: “Thewoman in the foregrounddepicted lyingon thegroundandaiminga rifle is ZuniGujjari, awomanfromamilkman'sfamilywhobecamerenownedasamilitantsupporteroftheNationalConference,themainKashmiri nationalist party. Theblack andwhite photograph is ofmembers of theWomen's SelfDefence Corps, a women'smilitia set up largely by Communist supporters of the National Conference inOctober-November1947,whenSrinagarwasindangerofbeingoverrunbyanarmyofPakistanitribesmen”(Whitehead,n.d.:1-2).

ParasharalsoborrowsRitaManchanda’s(2001)assessmentofwomen’sengagementinthe

Kashmiri militancy during the 1990s. The first mode of involvement included the public

participationofwomen inprotestsagainst the IndianstateandArmedForces;comingout

ontothestreets in favourof themilitancyandraisingslogansaboutAzadi (Freedom). It is

saidthatmothersput“hennaonthehandsofhersonandsendshimoffnottoabridebutto

fightaholywar;amartyr’smotherwhorefuses tomournatherson’s funeral” (Parashar,

2011:309).Parashar(2011:299)saysthat“acommonsloganofthetimes”thatwasquoted

toherinherinterviewswas“ayemard-e-mujahidjagzara,abwaqt-eshahadataayahai”(O

holywarriors arise and awake, the time formartyrdom has come!). Apart from this very

public support of the militancy, women “sheltered militants in their homes, cooked for

them,andtookcareofthem,allthewhilenurturingnationalistaspirationsliketheKashmiri

men”(Parashar,2011:299).Earlyoninthemilitancyithasalsobeensuggested“anumberof

youngKashmiriwomeneven travelledacross theborder toPakistan to receive training in

armsandammunitionsbutthereisnoinformationaboutwhethertheyactuallyparticipated

in armed attacks” (Parashar, 2011:299). Later on however, Parashar (2011:299) indicates

thatadeepsenseofdisillusionment set inamongstKashmiriwomenwho then“began to

speak against themilitancy and its damaging impact on their lives”. As a result,women’s

supportforthemilitancywasseentodecline“inthelate1990s,afterthemilitantstookto

petty crimes in the Kashmir Valley and began to exploit the people for personal gain”

(Parashar,2011:299).Itisperhapsinevitablethen,thatitisthissubsequentdisillusionment

and stepping back of women from active roles in the militancy that has come to define

contemporary narratives of gender during/after the 1990s in Kashmir.While the archival

3/9/2014 Kashmir  47  Images  -­  Andrew  Whitehead

http://www.andrewwhitehead.net/kashmir-­47-­images.html 1/19

Kashmir  47  Images

'Kashmir  Defends  Democracy'

The  pamphlet  cover  displayed  above  is  from  a  title  published  in  1948  by  the  Kashmir  Bureau  of  Information  in  Delhi.  Thedesign  is  arresting,  and  clearly  leftist  in  inspiration.  The  designer  (the  name  is  in  the  bottom  left  hand  corner)  was  SobhaSingh,  at  the  time  a  young  progressive  artist.  In  later  years,  he  became  better  known  for  his  religious  paintings  of  the  SikhGurus.  

The  woman  in  the  foreground  depicted  lying  on  the  ground  and  aiming  a  rifle  is  Zuni  Gujjari,  a  woman  from  a  milkman'sfamily  who  became  renowned  as  a  militant  supporter  of  the  National  Conference,  the  main  Kashmiri  nationalist  party.  The

Andrew WhiteheadHOME BLOG ENTHUSIASMS COLLECTING  PASSIONS RADIO  GEMS GALLERY CONTACT

86

researchdiscussedabove ledmetoaskmanyofmyEx-militant interviewees if therewere

womenEx-militants that Icouldspeakwith, Iwasgenerallymetwithbemusedsmilesand

the response thatwomendidnot fightduring themilitancy inKashmir.This silenceabout

‘womanaswarrior’providesmuchroomtobestudiedasalargerperformancethatseeksto

subsumetheidentityofKashmiri‘womanasvictim’;atrapintowhichIhadmyselffallenand

perpetuatedwithCages.

This theoretical framing – ofwhatmightmake someone a ‘perpetrator’ of violencemore

generally, what has led to individuals joining the militancy specifically in the Kashmiri

context,militants attitudes toward the art form of the theatre, and the performativity of

gender in narratives of the Kashmiri militancy – was important in shaping my auto-

ethnographic positioning whilst working with Ex-militants. For example, why particular

individuals joined themilitancy tied inwithwhether or not theywerewilling to talk to a

mainlandIndianlikeme.Thestrengthoftheiropinionsaboutthetheatrehadaninfluence

onopennesstospeakwithatheatremakerandtheinterviewees’approachestogender,in

turn, an impact on how they viewed my presence as a lone woman in male-dominated

spheres of interaction. Before going into the work that occurred as a result of these

considerations,Iincludebelowashortauto-ethnographicexcerptthatemergedduringthis

phaseoftheproject:

“Nono,that’snotwhatIwantedyoutoshow”,hesaid,“theguycomestohishousewhilehisparentsareawayandtrytogethimtojointhemilitancy”.

TheEKTAactorstrytoperformthescenethewaytheyarebeingdirected.“Nono,you’renotdoingitright.Letmejustshowyouhowtodoit”.TheEKTAactorslookatmewithtwinklesintheireyes.Hadn’tthisguyjustsaidthathehadneverdonetheatre

before?Wehadbeensittinginthatoneroom,inadilapidatedoldbuildinginapartofSrinagarthatIhadneverbeentobefore, for about seven hours. A room that smelled of stale cigarette smoke, filledwith about tenmen ofvariousages: smoking,watching the improvisation,waiting for their turn to speak tome, listening tomusic,andsmokingsomemore.Amidstthevibrantchaosofthemoment,thewomencameincarryingchaiandbreadand I got the feeling that I always do when I occupy male-dominated spheres in Kashmir and encounter,suddenly,whatIamsupposedtobedoinginthatcontext.Discomfort.Acutediscomfort.Thewomensitdownaftertheyservethechaiandbiscuitsthough.Theystayandchatabouttheirfamilies,abouttheirexperienceswhiletheirhusbandswentawaytofightorwereimprisoned,abouttheirdayjobsasteachers.Theirhusbandsspeakofthetimestheyleftthemduringthemilitancy,oftheirfailuresashusbands….“Whenwefirstgotmarried,weonlyhadoneblankettosharebetweenthetwoofus.IfIpulledittoomuch,shewouldfalloutofit,

87

ifshepulledittoomuch,Iwouldfallout”.

“Lifeinjailwasbetter.Inthere,Ihadtimetoread,topray,tosleep.

NowIhavetoworryaboutmywife,ourchildren,andprovidingforthem.Lifeinjailwasbetter.”

“SometimesIthinkIshouldneverhavemarriedthisgirl.

WhathaveIgivenherexceptsorrow?”

“No,Iwouldn’tbecomfortablewithyouspeakingtomywife.Ihadtoleaveherforabout15years,whenIwenttoPakistan…Idon’tknowhowshetookcareofourchildrenandmanaged.

Idon’tknowhowshedidit…Idon’twanthertohavetotalkaboutit.”

TheEx-militantsofKashmir,theirwives,theirfights…anentireworlduntoitself.

Auto-ethnographicExcerpt3

MeriKahaniMeriZabani,MyStoryMyWords43

The practice in this phase of the project emerged in collaboration with EKTA and an

organization--theJammuandKashmirHumanWelfareAssociation,JKHWA--thatworksfor

therehabilitationofEx-militantsinKashmir.Thisorganisationwasidentifiedthroughonline

socialmedianetworksand isamongthefewgroupswithanonlinepresencethatclaimto

work with/for/about Ex-militants in Kashmir. JKHWA was the only one that responded

favourably tomydesire toengagewithEx-militants through theatremaking. Like theCivil

Societyphasetherefore,thatreliedonsnowballconnectionsandinformalriskassessments

to findcollaborators, JKHWA’s founderandmyselfwere inconstantcommunication inthe

monthsleadinguptothefieldwork;JKHWAwasalsoinformallyvettedbyEKTA’sdirectorso

as to ensure some degree of accountability vis-à-vis the organization’s work in Kashmir.

While JKHWA’s founder/facilitator said that the Ex-militants he knew would not want to

participate in a theatre workshop – due to a lack of time and understanding of what

‘theatre’is–heagreedtoorganiseconversationsforme,withhiscolleagues.Therefore,he

identified individualshe thoughtwouldbe interesting forus – twoactors fromEKTAwho

wanted to accompany me -- to speak with vis-à-vis their experiences of the militancy in

Kashmir.Thefacilitator introducedustomenwhohadbeenpartofthemilitancyatsome

point in their lives, had crossed over to Pakistan or Afghanistan to be trained and had

decided–forvariousreasons–toputdowntheirguns.Clearly,therewasabiasastowhom

43 (Dinesh&EKTA,2014a)

88

I was introduced and a profile that the interviewees fit: all of them were ‘surrendered’

militantswhohadgivenupviolence,allofthemweresomehowconnectedwithJKHWA,and

all of them were open to meeting someone from mainland India; a willingness that in

Kashmiralreadyreadstomanyasbeing‘pro-India’.Ultimately,theinterviewswithmembers

of JKHWAcontributedmaterial that inspiredaDocumentaryTheatreperformanceentitled

MeriKahaniMeriZabani (MKMZ;translates inEnglishtoMyStoryMyWords).Therestof

thischapterwillnowperusethemanynuanceswithintheaesthetics,pedagogy,andethics

inMMKZ--duringtheinterviews,theworkshopprocesses,theperformancesandthepost-

showdiscussions.

MKMZ44soughttoperformthenarrativesofEx-militantsinKashmirthroughaprocessthat

consisted of three steps: the first step was composed of interviews with Kashmiri Ex-

militants, thesecondstep involvedcollaboratingwithEKTAtoweavethe interviews intoa

performance piece, and the third step involved trial performances of the piece for the

intervieweesand subsequent showingsofMKMZ for small audiencesofnon-interviewees.

While the intervieweeswere complimentary of the integritywithwhich theirwordswere

put intoperformance,manyofournon-intervieweeaudiencemembersreactednegatively

to what they perceived as the performance’s misrepresentation of the ‘truth’. The non-

intervieweeaudiencemembersaccusedtheex-militantsoflyingintheirinterviewsandasa

consequencewe, the creatorsof thepiece,wereaccusedofperformingpropaganda. This

critical response put me, as the facilitator-director, at the crux of a conflict: the conflict

betweenan ‘honest’ representationof the interviewees’wordsandthemisrepresentation

that was perceived by the non-interviewees who saw the piece. This conflict between

representationandmisrepresentationlayattheheartofMKMZandprovokedinsightsthat

wereasauto-ethnographicastheywereethnographic.

Ethics,Aesthetics,Pedagogy&theInterviews

As described in Chapter One, Jenny Hughes (2011:93) draws attention to Documentary

Theatreandsuggeststhreeprimarymodalitiesinwhichthisformofperformancemightbe

usedtohighlightthemesofwarandterror:theexceptional,theforensicandthecomposed.

By exceptional,Hughes “refers to the staging of testimony from spaces of exception” as

44Thissectionborrowsfrommyarticle(Dinesh,2015c).However,extensivealterationshavebeenmadetothepublishedwriting.

89

inspiredbyGiorgioAgamben’s(2005)articulationsoftheconcept;byforensic,Hughesrefers

toplays thathingeupontranscripts/archives thatareavailable in thepublic realm;by the

composed,Hughesreferstoplaysthatarebothforensicallyobtainedfromarchivesbutalso

composedbydirectors/playwrights.MKMZinvolvedelementsofallthreeandbyexploring

eachofthesestrategies,thefollowingpagesseektopoeticallyperformtheproject’slayers

of(mis)representation.

Itmightbeargued thatKashmirhasbeen ina stateofexception since1947and that the

surgeofthemilitancyinthe1990sfurtherproliferatedthisstatus.Byusingtheterm‘state

ofexception’here,ImeanthatKashmirbeingseen/describedbydifferentlyinvestedparties

asawarzoneleadstotheirjustifiyingan‘exceptional’useofcontrol/violenceinKashmiras

compared to most other parts of the sub-continent. While the ways in which this

‘exceptional’ treatment of Kashmir manifests is outside the scope of this writing, what

intrigued me in MKMZ was to consider Ex-militants as inhabiting their own spaces of

exceptionwithinthislargercrisis-riddencontext.TheIndianstate’sfearsofmilitantinduced

crises, civilians’mistrust of formermilitants and activemilitants’ derogatory viewof their

‘surrendered’ comrades have led to these ex-fighters inhabiting a liminal space in which

exceptional treatment isbothexpectedandmetedout to them;at least, that iswhatwas

indicated to me in the interviews. For instance, many of the interviewees told me that

government forces, active militants, and civilians alike constantly police ex-militants.

DrawingparallelswiththeexperiencesofsomeVietnamwarveteransupontheirreturnto

UnitedStates, theexperiencesof theseKashmiriex-militantsmightbeseenthroughPeter

Goldman et al.’s (1983) comments that the fighters returned “to a kind of embarrassed

silence”,theircountryhaving“burdenedthemwithitsownguiltontheonehandforhaving

lostthewarandontheotherforhavingfoughtitatall”(inTaft-Kaufman,2000:28).Given

that theKashmirimilitancy is seenbymanyashavingnotaccomplishedanything towards

resolving the conflicts in the region, Taft-Kaufman (2000:28) bring together a variety of

sources to caution us that “such forgetfulness…is wilful and isolating: it drives wedges

betweentheindividualandthecollectivefatetowhichheorsheisforcedtosubmit”.

In Kashmir, Ex-militants or those suspected of being returned fighters, are the first to be

arrestedwhen there isany incidenceofviolence in theirneighbourhoods.Ex-militantsare

very rarely issued passports and many of them live in isolation within their own

90

communities.Considered‘failures’ forthenumberofciviliancasualtiesduringtheyearsof

themilitancyand for the lackof tangibleoutcomes frommore thanadecadeofviolence,

there was a strong sense amongst the interviewees that there has been/is a systematic

eliminationof Ex-militants from the socio-political fabric of Kashmir;making thempart of

whatAgamben(2005:2)referstoas“categoriesofcitizenswhoforsomereasoncannotbe

integratedintothepoliticalsystem”.ThisisnottosaythatallEx-militantsfindthemselvesin

these spaces of exception; there are some individuals who now play visible roles in the

politicalarenaofKashmir.HoweveritisperhapsfairtosaythatthemenIspokewithaspart

ofMKMZwerenotthehigh-rankingmilitants;notthecommanders.Mostoftheex-militants

whospoketomewere/claimedtobemiddlemen in theirmilitantgroups; themenwhose

namesseldommadethelimelight;themenwhosesurrenderwaspublicisedunderpolicies

of‘rehabilitation’bytheIndiangovernmentandviewedbymanyothers(previouscomrades,

familymembers,andsoon)ascolludingwiththeIndianArmedForces.Thislastgroupthat

has been accused of collusion with the Indian government forces – with and without

evidence – creates another layer of tension among the Ex-militant communities.. The

Ikhwans,asthese‘renegades’arecommonlyreferredto,aresaidtobeKashmiriex-militants

whoarenowpaidbytheIndianGovernment’sArmedForcestocarryoutthestate’sagenda.

SinceIkhwansaresaidtobe“inflatedtopositionsofsuperiorityovertheirfellow-oppressed

people” and are “armedby thedominant group” to “resort to violence against their own

people”, tobecalledan Ikhwani is tobeclassifiedasa traitorwhocollaborates“with the

dominantgroup insteadof challenging it” (Foster,Haupt&DeBeer,2005:70).Oneof the

strongestcritiquesofMKMZtherefore,camefromoneofourspectatorswhosaidthatwe

hadcreatedanIkhwanipiecei.e.,apiecethatonlyincludedthenarrativesofthosewhohad

‘soldout’toIndia–therewillbefurtherdiscussionaroundthisbelow.

Giventhisfraughtcontext,whatcouldIaskEx-militantsinaninterview?Balfour,Hughesand

Thompson (2009:86)draw fromJulieSalverson’s (1996)commentson theethicsofasking

forandtellingriskystoriesthatas“artistsandeducators,wemustcontinuallyaskourselves:

inwhatcontextareriskystoriesbeingtold?Withinwhatframeworksdidtheyoriginate?And

what is the cost to the speaker?” At the heart of these questions lies the notion of

responsibility that, for a mainland Indian theatre maker in Kashmir, meant “an

understanding that thereare stakes for thosewithwhomwework-- stakes thatexist,but

91

arenevermorethanpartiallyknowable”(Balfour,Hughes&Thompson,2009:86).Warythat

the process of soliciting narratives from the interviewees to create a theatre piecemight

become a problematic reproduction "of cultural colonialism that is at the very least

voyeuristic” (Balfour, Hughes & Thompson, 2009:86), how could I engage with the ex-

militants in amanner thatwould respect their ‘truths’whilebeing consciousof themany

politicalmachinations thatwereatplaybetween thatwhichwas saidand thatwhichwas

not?HowcouldInegotiatethe“responsibilityofthewitness”andaccessthecodeswithin

the narratives that were being shared with me without “thoughtlessly soliciting

autobiographies”(Thompson,2005:217)?HowcouldIdesignmyinterviewssoastodisturb

the interviewees’ intentional and unintentional (mis)representations of themselves, while

simultaneouslybeingaware that“a story retoldcaneraseothers” (Thompson,2005:217)?

How would I negotiate “the responsibility of the witness” and contend with the likely

consequence of dismantling the story of the teller (Thompson, 2005:217)? How would I

considerthedifferentrelationshipstothestoriesi.e.,therelationbetweenthestoryandits

teller, versus the subsequent relationships between their stories and the EKTA actors/

spectators,andworktowardwhatThompson(2005:217)calls“anequalityofdifferences”?

In order to address all these questions, the interviews were designed so as to create an

atmosphere thatwouldbe imaginativeandplayful, almost as a theatreworkshop forone

person i.e., the interviewee. The questions and activities that are presented in Table 5,

below,werethereforechosensoastoincludeelementsofplayandenableanambiencein

whichtheresearcher’squerieswouldbelesslikelytobeconflatedwitharequestforstories

of trauma and suffering. But, like most theatre practice that seeks to work outside

traditionalcontexts,thereemergedanenormousgapbetweenintentionandaction.

Table4:DesignofInterviewsinJuly2014

Mainquestions

Fortheex-militantinterviewees1. ShowtheeditedvideoofCagesandbyusingthatasanexample,asktheintervieweestoconsiderthefollowing:

• Iftheaudiencememberweretoembodyyou,insteadofthebrideinCages,whatexperiencewouldyouwanttogivethem?

• Theevent/situation inCages iswhathappens toawomanduring/afterawedding. If youhad tochoosesuchasituation/eventfortheembodimentofyourexperience,whatwouldthatbe?

• ThebrideinCagesundertookactionslikewashingdishesandcooking,actionsthatareconsidereddailyactivitiesforwomeninKashmir,whatactionsdefineyou?

2. Ifthereweretobeaplayaboutyourlife,whatoneincidentwouldyouwanttoincludeabout:• Whyyoujoinedthemilitancy

92

• Yourlifeduringmilitancy• Thetransitionpoint–whenyoudecidedyouwantedtoleavethemilitancy• Lifeasanex-militant

3. Whatarethreewordsyouwouldusetodescribeyourselfandwhy?4. If you could record amessage to someonewho is completely different from you,whomwould youchooseandwhatwouldyousay?

5. If you had to create a three-minute movie about your life, for someone who has NOT had thatexperience,whatwouldyouputinit?

• EKTAactorsaredirectedbytheinterviewee,asindicatedintheAuto-ethnographicExcerptabove.6. Ifyoucouldliveanywhereintheworld,wherewouldyouliveandwhy?7. Ifyoudidn’thavetheseproblems,whatwouldyouwanttobeandwhy?Fortheex-militantinterviewee’swife,ifpossible1. Haveyoueverwantedtogetadivorcefromyourhusbandorquestionedhisactions?2. Beingthewifeofanex-militant,whathaveyouhadtoendure?3. Whatarethedreamsthatyouhavehadtogiveupontosupportyourhusband?4. Howdidyourparents/hisparentssupportyouwhileyourhusbandwasamilitant,andhowhasthatchangednow?

Fortheex-militantinterviewees’children,ifpossible1. Haveyoueverwonderedifyourfatherhasdonewrong?2. Haveyouhadtofaceaccusationsforhisactions?3. Wouldyourlifehavebeendifferentiffatherhadnotbeenmilitant?Backupideas1. Ifyouweretheinterviewerandhadtodesignaninterviewforyou,whatwouldyouaskyourself?Whatdoyouthinkanyoneinterviewingyoushouldknowaboutyou?

• Oncetheyhavedraftedtheinterviewquestions,Iwillaskthemexactlythosequestionsandrecordresponses.

2. SharethegraphicnovelcreatedaboutaKashmiriex-militant’slife(NaseerAhmedandSaurabhSingh’sKashmirPending):

• Whatareyourresponsestosuchapproachestoarticulatethemilitantexperience?• Wheredoesitsucceedandwheredoesitfail?

3.Askintervieweestocreatetimelinesinpairs,whereonepersonspeakstosignificantmomentsintheirlifewhiletheotherrecordsthemonasheetofpaperinatimelineformat.Thepersonrecordingcanaskquestions.Onceeachpersonhastheirtimeline,theychoosea‘turningpoint’momentwhichtheycan:

• Freewriteabout• Audiorecord• Writeapoemabout• Createacollageabout

4. Ask interviewees to create a pictorialmapofwhere they live and the routines and routes they takeeveryday:

• Whatisyourregular,daily,routine?• Whatmemoriesdoparticularplacesinyourcityholdforyou?• Map your daily walks around your community and take photos of sites that you have hadassociationswith(people,places,etc)

5. Create a rough script together of the interviewee’s daily activities from 8 am to 10 pm on anordinary/specialday(astheywant)orshootavideoofasignificantdayoreventintheirlives.

• Ifyouhadthechancetodocument/createoneshortmovie/scriptaboutyourself,whatwouldyouchoose?Howcanwegoaboutmakingthatvideo?

• If you had the chance to document/create one shortmovie about anOther, howwould you dothat?

• Whatwouldhappeninthisperformanceofaneverydayinyourlife?

93

With theseplansandback-upplans inplace, the interviewsbeganwithme togetherwith

twoactors fromEKTAshowing interviewees thevideoofCages.Whileoneof thegoalsof

thisscreeningwastosharesomethingofourwork,ourprimaryobjectiveinbeginningeach

interviewwiththevideowastoaddressthepotential issueofourintervieweesmaybenot

understanding what we meant by ‘theatre’. So as to prevent this potential gap in our

communication,eachinterviewbeganwithaframingofourworkwiththevideoofCages–

usingourpreviousproductionasameansofexplainingwhatatheatricaladaptationoftheir

words might become. Despite these intentions however, showing the video seemed an

insufficient strategybywhich toexplain this concept.Only twoor threeof themore than

twentypeoplewe interviewedhadhadanyexposure to the theatreand itwas these few

individualswho expressed an understanding ofMKMZ from the outset. Amajority of the

individualshowever,especiallythosewithoutanunderstandingoftheconceptof‘theatre’,

explicitly expressed their scepticism toward outsiderswho asked about their experiences.

Additionally, since the recording of Cages was viewed on a laptop, many interviewees

thought the researcher was a television director/journalist/producer despite multiple

attempts to clarify our positioning. As a result of thismisunderstanding, given their prior

experiences with watching TV and reading newspapers, their responses were

(mis)represented tousas such.Theproclivityofmedia channels inKashmirandmainland

Indiatofocusonthemesof‘trauma’and‘suffering’whentalkingabouttheregionseemed

toinfluencetheresponsesinourinterviews.AsKaySchafferandSidonieSmith(inForsyth&

Megson, 2009:217) indicate, “repeated narrations of trauma can perpetually freeze

narratorsintheroleofvictimsofsuchabuse”.Therefore,althoughwetried“topaycareful

attention to the repressive and exclusionary functions ofwitnessing narratives of crisis at

oneremove”(Hughes2011:107),boththeEKTAactorsandmyselfwerecaughtinacomplex

webofourownmaking;of“hearingastoryofferedbythetelleras‘true’”thatplacedus,as

listeners, “in an ethical relation to that story” (Thompson 2005:217) that we could not

disavow.

Asecondstruggleintheinterviewprocessaroseinhowthesessionsfunctioned.Whilethe

interview design in Table 5 was created with the understanding that there would be an

intimate,private,andclosedspaceinwhichtheinterviewswouldbeconducted,thereality

wassignificantlydifferent.Onamajorityoftheoccasions,whiletheJKHWAFacilitatorhad

94

scheduledtheinterviewtotakeplacewithoneortwoparticularindividuals,multiplepeople

fromtheprimaryinterviewee’slocality/familywouldjointhesessionandwhileadaywould

initiallybeginwiththeplantointerviewonepersonforacoupleofhours,itwouldbecomea

six to sevenhour longexpedition that involved talking toabout tenpeople.While I could

havemadestrictdemandsforthekindofinterviewscenariothathadinitiallybeenimagined,

this iswhere thenotionof situational ethicsbecameprevalent inmy choiceof approach.

RealisingthatmypresenceinthehomesofEx-militantswasextremelycomplexandrisky--

mypositioningasayoung,mainlandIndianwomaninafairlyremotelocation,withamale-

dominated group of Kashmiri Ex-militants that was (possibly) under the surveillance of

variously invested parties – Imade a conscious effort to not control or dictate the larger

structuresatplay.Manyatimetherefore,thedesignoftheinterviewsasabovehadtobe

completely discarded. Each interview changed and morphed: sometimes becoming an

informal chat; sometimesmanifesting as a rehearsed speech; other times endingwith an

elaborate meal in rooms filled with men smoking cigarettes. The idea of executing the

interviews as theatre workshops for a small participant group therefore, became a

theoretical exercise thatwhile useful formyself and the EKTA collaborators to frame the

process,didnotsucceedduringtheactualpracticeoftheinterviews.

In addition to this constant change of events, what was most unexpected about the ex-

militantinterviewees’narrativesofsufferingandvictimisationwasthedistancingthatthose

narratives then allowed them from their acts of ‘perpetration’ when they were active

militants. Foster, Haupt and De Beer (2005:63) draw from Roy Baumeister (1997) who

“showedasharpdifference intheperspectivesofvictimsandperpetrators”thatmightbe

considered a “magnitude gap”. In this space, there is a “discrepancy between the

importanceofthedeedtovictimandperpetrator.Theact isof fargreatersignificancefor

the victims; to the perpetrator it is ‘often a very small thing’” (Foster, Haupt & De Beer,

2005:63).Whileitmighthavebeenthecasethatitwasaquestionoftrust(theinterviewees

notknowingiftheycouldtrustus)insteadofitbeingthecasethattheseex-militantsdidnot

recognise the significance of their violent actions, the distance that the interviewees

maintainedfromtheiractsofviolencesubstantiatewhatBaumeistersays,thatfortheseex-

militants“thememoryof theevent fadesmorequickly”.This furthersuggests thatactsof

violencemightappear“lessevil”totheperpetrators,who“ironically[count]themselvesas

95

victims”andveertowarddefendingtheirviolentactionsinamannerthatservesto“lessen

their responsibility” (Foster,Haupt&DeBeer, 2005:63). Resonatingwith this postulation,

theKashmiri ex-militantswhowere interviewed forMKMZ tended to ignoreor glossover

theirownactsofviolencewhilestressingtheirownvictimisations,creatingaconundrumfor

usastheatremakers.

MichaelBalfour(2007:7)speakstoasimilardilemmawhenspeakingwithasoldierinKosovo

whomentions very little in his testimony about “the atrocities he encountered andmust

havebeenapartof”.Attributingthecause for thissilenceto“thenatureof the interview

(with a theatre academic)” Balfour (2007:7) says that, “the rhetoric of heroism and

martyrdom obscured analyses” in this soldier’s testimony “and generated generalised

anecdotes that were often hard to penetrate”. Likewise, what the Kashmiri ex-militant

intervieweeswerewillingtoputforwardintheirconversationsweretheirownexperiences

of hardship during and after themilitancy: of being victimised by Indian and/or Pakistani

governmentspriortotheirtakingupmilitancy;ofbeingvictimisedafterthemilitancywhen

theyhadelectedtoputdowntheirguns;ofthesufferingthatwascausedbytheirfamilies

andneighbours’rejectionofthembecauseoftheirpastacts;ofinjusticesmetedouttothem

duringthemilitancybythehierarchieswithintheirownmilitantranks,andbygovernment

forceswhen theywere captured/incarcerated. Therewas a deafening silence then, about

theirlivesduringthemilitancyitself;abouttimesinwhichthesemendidnot/hadnotseen

themselvesas‘victims’butrather,asagentsofactionintheirownlives.Althoughthereisno

denying theveracityof thevarious (perceived)victimisations that the intervieweesshared

withus,whenthisvictimhoodwasnotplacedintoconversationwiththeirownperpetration

duringthemilitancy,thetaskofdecipheringthesub-textbecameextremelyproblematic.

Thisconflictbetweenthesaidandtheunsaid,betweentruthandfalsehood,whileextremely

contentious,was a grey zone that I approached in the spirit of an artist rather than as a

citizen.InthewordsofHaroldPinter(inHughes2007:151):

Therearenoharddistinctionsbetweenwhatisrealandwhatisunreal,norbetweenwhatistrueandwhatisfalse.Athingisnotnecessarilyeithertrueorfalse;itcanbebothtrueand false. I believe that these assertions still make sense and do still apply to theexplorationofrealitythroughart.SoasawriterIstandbythembutasacitizenIcannot.AsacitizenImustask:Whatistrue?Whatisfalse?

96

Prioritisingmy identity as an artist during the interviews therefore, rather than that of a

citizen who asks what is true and false, this researcher’s response to the interviewees’

silenceabout theiractsofviolencemeantanacceptanceof theirnarrativesasbeingboth

trueandfalse;anethicalrecognitionthatsignificantlyshapedthesubsequentchoicesthat

weremadeinMKMZ.Itcannotbeignoredhowever,thatthispositioningwasnotacceptable

tomany of my colleagues in Kashmir who, as described in Chapter Two’s considerations

around political affiliations as performances, saw my absence of focus on truth and

falsehoodtobedisingenuousandinsufficientintheKashmiricontext.Again,asmentioned

earlier, this greyness in my own political affiliations (or lack thereof) is a point of much

contentionduringeveryproject Iundertake inKashmirandat themomentofwriting this

dissertation,remainsanunresolvedconundrum.

Ethics,Aesthetics,Pedagogy&theWorkshops

Icomeacrossverycoldandcalculatinginit,andmaybeintheinterviewthat'swhatcameacross,Idon'tknow…acoupleofinterviewscan'tsumupahumanbeing,itcan'tdoit,soit'sabigleapoffaithtalkingtoanyonelikethat(MageeinHughes,2011:111).

RobinSoans’TalkingtoTerroristsisaworkthathasreceivedsomeattentionfordrawingin

narratives from the space of ‘terrorism’. However, PatrickDuggan (2013:154) draws from

AmandaStuart-Fisher’s(2011:113)critiqueoftheplaywhichsuggests“thattheworkwhile

tellingstoriesofterrorismthatare‘oftenhorrific,brutal,andtrue”’,neverthelessofferslittle

beyonda“word-for-wordre-tellingofpersonalstoriesofterrorism”,allofwhichreinforcea

simplistic message that “all terrorism is bad and therefore we shouldn’t do it”. Duggan

(2013:154) extrapolates further from Stuart-Fisher’s argument, that Talking to Terrorists

“neither penetrates the trauma or the act of terrorism, nor discloses any insight into the

politics of these situations”. In order to prevent MKMZ from falling into such a trap of

possiblereductionism,itwasimperativeforme,asfacilitator-director,toconsidertheplace

of fiction in theprocessof transposing thewordsof the interviewees intoaDocumentary

and Immersive Theatre performance. Building on the spirit of the quotation from Harold

Pinter that ended the section above, was there a place for the non-

verbatim/fictional/abstractinseeingtheirwordsasbeingbothtrueandfalse?Thepotential

forthefictionalinDocumentaryTheatremightbeseeninHughes’comments(2011)about

DavidHare’splayStuffHappenswhereshesuggeststhat“writingfictionalspeechprovides

97

anopportunity to bringout the things that donot get said in life, the things that no-one

quitecatchesholdof,becauselifegoesveryfast”.Hughes(2011:114)furthercommentsthat

“thisembracingofthenotquitespoken”becomes integraltoaperformancethatseeksto

target“thelimitationsofdemocracyanditsassumptionsaboutthetransparencyofspeech

inthepublicsphere”.ByexploringthegreyzonebetweenrealityandfictioninDocumentary

Theatreeffortstherefore,aplaylikeStuffHappenspresentsthe“artisticparadox”that“by

tellinglieswe[might]reachthetruth”(Hughes,2011:114).

InordertotakeforwardthisconsiderationoffictioninthecreationofMKMZ,Iturnedtothe

forensicstrategyofDocumentaryTheatrethatHughes(2011)employs,soastonuancethe

material from the interviews. This forensic approach entailed a detailed consultation of

publically available archival materials about the experience of Kashmiri Militants/Ex-

militants: theoccasionalnewspaperarticle, the relativelyunknowngraphicnovel,archives

from friends and colleagues who did not want to be interviewed but shared their

experiences of themilitancy, and other similarmaterial. Ultimately however, aswith any

other process of editing, what was retained and what was edited out was eventually an

artisticdecisionthatmightbeseenthroughtheBarthesian(1993)conceptsofthe“studium”

andthe“punctum”:thestudiumbeingthelargercontextofKashmirandthecommonalities

thatweresharedintheinterviews;thepunctum,asRolandBartheswrites(1993:27),being

thosemoments from the interviews and archival research “whichpricksme andbruises”.

TheseBarthesian ideas of the studiumand thepunctumare significant to the creationof

MKMZ since the process of editing hours of interview footage into one performance

involvedchoosingmaterialthatsomehow“prickedme”.Itmustbeacknowledged,herethat

inthisprocessofeditingtheinterviewfootageandarchivalmaterialtogiveshapetoMKMZ,

persuasive voices had to be cut out “because of editorial judgements about the overall

narrativeshapeandstructure”;editsthatwhilenecessarysoastogivetheperformancean

aesthetic cohesion “are not necessarily the correct judgements” (Balfour, Hughes &

Thompson,2009:21).

Table5:ProcessofScriptingMKMZ(AllphotoscourtesyofDinesh&EKTA,2014a)

98

Step1:CreatingthegeneralrulesMKMZwillinvolve:

1) Four monologues culled from interview transcripts, encompassing the four main themes thatemerged in more than twenty interviews: The Idealist, The Framed, The Disillusioned, TheReturned.

2) Symbolicpiecesthatuseonephrase+oneactionfromtheinterviewmaterial;inspiredbyMarinaAbramovic’sArtmustbebeautiful, theartistmustbebeautiful (1975)whereAbramovic repeatsthisonephrasealongsidethesingularactoftheartistbrushingherhair.

3) Three composed (fictional/creative) strategies, that drew from forensic archival research, tonuancethetruth/falsehoodoftheverbatimtextinthemonologues:

• Thepoet-guideswhorecitecoupletswhenleadingtheaudiencefromonescenetothenext• Theaestheticelements(installations,sounds,andsmells)• The‘manwiththehen’

Step2:WorkshopthestructureabovewithEKTAandscriptthepiece.Step3:FinalStructureofMKMZ

AudienceentersRoom1wherethepoet-guidesgreetthem.

AudienceistakentoRoom2whereayoungmanrepeatedlywrites‘Iam not...’ on scattered pieces of paperwhilst singing Kailash Kher’s(2004)song“Lautado,lautado,Kashmirdobara”

• Return Kashmir to me again: a song that the founder ofJKHWA claimedwashis favourite pieceofmusic andwouldliketobeincludedinMKMZ)

Audience is taken to Room 3 (The IdealistMonologue), where theywitness a monologue by an ideologue ex-militant. This monologuecouldbesummedupwiththecharacter’s line:“Iamnotashamedofwhat I did. Yes, some mistakes happened but we were fighting forKashmir.”

Audience is taken toRoom4where they seea youngman trying totalk,while shackled, saying repeatedly, “Wearehelpless people,wecannotdoanythingforourlives.”

• The line came from an interview about one individual’sexperienceasanex-militantinKashmir

• The action was devised in response to an interviewee’saccountsofhistimeinprison

AudienceistakentoRoom5(TheFramedMonologue):amonologue

99

aboutayoungmanwhoisa‘papermilitant’;someonewhowasneverinvolvedinthemilitancybutwasseenhostingamilitant inhishomeandthus,wasbrandedonehimself.

AudienceistakentoRoom6wherethreecharactersareinanasylumrepeatingthephrases“IamnotHindustani. IamnotPakistani.ThenwhoamI?”

• Thepiecewascreatedinresponsetoageneralsentimentinthe interviews, of Kashmiris being stuck between the largerstate powers of India and Pakistan while not identifyingcompletelywitheither

AudienceistakentoRoom7(TheReturnedMonologue):monologuebyayoungPakistaniwomanwhomarriedaKashmirimilitantacrosstheborderandhascomebacktohishomeland.Inherwords:‘Ikeeplecturingmyhusbandandtellinghim,youhavedonethistoyourself.Wecouldhavestayedthereandhadabetterlifebutinsteadyoukeptsaying:“We'llgotoKashmir,We'llgotoKashmir”’

AudienceistakenbacktoRoom1wherethepoet-guidesbidthemfarewell.

Version1ofMKMZ,beforeaudiencefeedback,includedafourthmonologuefromaDisillusionedMilitantwhowas critical of Pakistan’s involvement in Kashmir and a symbolic performance that showed a young manrepeatedlywashinghishairandsaying:“Idyedmyhairandgotanallergy.Whosefaultisthat?Mine?Orthedye’s?”--adirectquotefromoneoftheinterviews.Thereasonsbehindtheeditsofthesetwosegmentsareaddressedlaterinthischapter

RevisitingPrimoLevi’s ideaof the“greyzone”, LauraEdmondson’s (2009)analysesofErik

Ehn’s workMaria Kizito became useful in the process of creating MKMZ. Noticing the

parallels between what Ehn does in his dramatic adaptation of ‘perpetrator’ narratives

during the Rwandan genocide of 1994 and my own objectives with MKMZ, I borrowed

elementsfrom“Ehn’suniqueapproachtotestimony”(Edmondson,2009:70).Whileinmany

DocumentaryTheatreprojects“survivortestimoniesareusuallyendowedwiththestatusof

absolute and incontestable truths” (Edmondson, 2009:70), I wanted to draw from what

EdmondsondescribesasthenoveltyofEhn’sapproachtobei.e.,thatthetestimoniescould

beseeninsteadas“bitsandpiecesofamemorythat[have]beenoverwhelmedby…events

inexcessofour framesof reference,amemory thatcannotbe totalizedandcontained in

linear packaging” (Edmondson, 2009:70). Referring to a difference between dramatic and

narrative modes where “dramatic form shows, narrative form tells” (Taft-Kaufman,

2000:21),MKMZ’s approach to creating a dramatic piece from the interviewees’ bits and

100

piecesofmemorywasguidedbythenotionthat“it ispreciselywhat isnot inthearchive,

whatisaddedbymakingthearchiveintorepertory,thatinfusesdocumentarytheatrewith

itsparticulartheatricalviability”(Martin,2006:11).

ItisimportanttomentionherethatImmersiveTheatre,whilerelevanttothefinaldesignof

MKMZ as a site-sensitive, promenade performance, was not as significant an aesthetic

concept as inCages.This choicewas informed by the ethical problematic of the extreme

aesthetic novelty in Cages, as discussed in Chapter Two, alongside a testing of whether

process-basedspectatorshipwouldemergeasbeingrelevantwhentheformwaslessnovel.

With these considerations in mind, MKMZ was centred on Hughes’s three categories of

Documentary Theatre and wove together the “forensic” and “composed”, with

“exceptional” strategies. Many hours of recorded interviews were distilled into four

monologuesandsmallerimage-basedvignettesthataimedtousestory-tellingtechniquesto

also showcase what was unspoken in the interviews. As Thompson (2009:18) says,

“storytellingisawonderfullyrich,diverseanddelicatewayofreflectingandmediatingour

livedexperience,butonly if it isnotcajoledintoasimplesolutionforthatnarrowbandof

suffering called trauma”; it was this non-simplistic storytelling that the monologues and

vignettessoughttoperform.

Whiletheuseofvoicesfrom“spacesofexception”(i.e.,theinterviews)werethepointsof

departureforthefourverbatimmonologuesandtheoneline/oneactionvignettesinspired

byMarinaAbramovic,asdescribedinTable6,theforensicandcomposedstrategiesbecame

useful in threeways: in the creation of poet-guides, in the creation of the ‘manwith the

hen’,andinthedesignelementsoftheperformance.Inordertohighlighttheimplicationsof

theseaestheticchoices,itisworthdrawingagainfromJulieSalverson(inBalfour,Hughes&

Thompson, 2009:87-88) who says that the “overemphasis upon a single, authentic story

does not allow for sufficient complexity, nuance, andmultiple points of entry” since the

dangerofasinglestoryliesinitsbeingessentialisedorromanticisedbythosewitnessingit.

Instead,Salverson(inBalfour,Hughes&Thompson,2009:87-88)putsforwardanapproach

that“speaksof'story'notasafixed,knowable,finitething,butasanopenonethatchanges

andcarrieswithitthepossibilityofreformingsandretellings”,suggestingthat“iftheoverly

symbolicorabstractisevasive,theoverlyliteralisalie”.

101

Thetwopoet-guidesbroughttogetherthecomposedandtheforensicthroughtherealmof

poetry. The poet-guides were characterised as shayars/poets and given that Urdu

shayaris/couplets rely on quick wit and contextual allusions, one of the actors playing a

poet-guideworkedwith director of EKTA to include existing couplets that hold particular

resonancesinKashmirandtowritenewcoupletsthatwouldnuancetheverbatimtextinthe

monologuesandvignettes.TheformoftheshayariisawidelypopularformofartinKashmir

andasC.M.Naim(1969)hasobserved,“InUrdusociety,poetry isthemostpublicformof

literature.Mushairas, or public readings of poetry, are still extremely popular, just as the

habitofquotingpoetryineverydayspeechisasstrongasever”(inMenon,2013:113-114).

Jisha Menon further considers the importance of the form of the ghazal, which holds

similarities to the shayari, by drawing from Kashmiri poet Aga Shahid Ali (in Menon,

2013:113-114) who might be quoted at length to substantiate the significance of our

characterizationofthepoet-guides:

The audience waits to see what the poet will do with the scheme established in theopeningcouplet…whenthepoetrecitesthefirstlineofacouplet,theaudiencerecitesitbacktohim,andthenthepoetrepeatsit,andtheaudienceagainfollowssuit.Thisbackandforthcreatesanimmenselyseductivetensionbecauseeveryoneiswaitingtoseehowthesuspensewillberesolvedintermsoftheschemeestablishedintheopeningcouplet;that is, thefirst lineofeverysucceedingcoupletsetsthereader(or listener)upsothatthesecond lineamplifies, surprises,explodes…theaudience issoprimed,sorousedbythistimethatitwouldbreakinwiththepoetattheend.

The significanceof the shayari as anaesthetic,pedagogical, andethical strategy inMKMZ

alsoemergesbecauseofthewaysinwhichsuchformsofUrdupoetryresista“reificationof

selfandother”and“disconcerttheselfwiththerecognitionofthesamenessoftheother,

without collapsing the distinction between them” (Menon, 2013:115-116). It is this in-

between/grey zone quality to the shayari that heightens its centrality to MKMZ, in “the

gentle oscillation between experience and expectation: between the hauntingmemory of

former such ghazals and the imaginative variation on an established theme” (Menon,

2013:116). By framing our forensic research with the composed strategy of the shayari

therefore, the EKTA creators and I hoped to create a poetics that would address the

problematic (mis)representations of the militancy that were voiced/silenced during the

interviews.

102

The second “composed” strategy of Documentary Theatre involved the creation of an

unnamedcharacterthatwecametocall‘themanwiththehen’whowalkedalongwiththe

audiencemembersthroughtheentirepiece.Tellingtheverysimpletaleofamancarryinga

henwho isultimatelyconvincedby thosearoundhimthathe is in factcarryingacat, the

storyofthe‘manwiththehen’45wassharedbyoneoftheintervieweesasanallegoryfor

manyofthecurrentrealitiesofKashmir–ofwhathadhappenedtomanymilitants,ofwhat

hadhappenedtotherehabilitationprocess,andofwhathadhappenedwithmanyfacetsof

theconflict.The‘manwiththehen’therefore,couldbeseenasastrategyofthe“difficult

return” (Balfour,Hughes&Thompson,2009:211)whereacharacter represents“a formof

memorialization where history is allowed to remain problematic and unresolved in the

present”.The‘manwiththehen’wascharacterisedsoasto“makeprovocativeconnections

betweenpastandpresent”andto“demandcritical;interrogationofcontemporaryrealities,

rather than safely bracket off the past from the present” (Balfour, Hughes & Thompson,

2009:211). As a result, this strategy of a “difficult return” became an element from the

exceptionalspaceofex-militantnarrativesthatweresubstantiatedbyforensicresearch,and

composedwithaestheticstrategiessoastocreateapoeticlinkbetweenfragmentedvoices

andnarratives.

The intersection of Hughes’ proposals around forensic and composed strategies to

DocumentaryTheatrewasalsouseful inthedesignofMKMZasasite-specific,promenade

performance. The setting and promenade strategies were inspired by two ideas: as a

metanarrative about the fragmentation innarratives and voiceswhen it comes todealing

with political questions in Kashmir and as a critique of our (myself as researcher and the

EKTAcreators’)vicariousandproblematicwitnessingofEx-militantexperiences.AsAnnette

Markham(2005:815-816)says,“thefragmentednarrativecanfunctionaspoliticalactionin

manyways”, toresist traditionalsystemsofknowingandrepresentationandto“openthe

spaceforreflexivityfor”creatorsandperformersalike.Giventhatpersonally,Ialsodidnot

want the piece to be seen as exhibiting any kind of propaganda, the choice of aesthetic

designsoughttohelpme“see—throughdisjuncture—[my]ownhabitsofinterpretation,to

reveal, or at least question, taken-for-granted patterns of sense making” (Markham,

45Thestorythatwasinitiallytoldinvolvedagoatthatiseventuallyseenasadog(asopposedtoahenthatisseenasacat).However,sincewewantedtoincludealiveanimalinthecreationofamulti-sensorialenvironment,itwasdeemedmorefinanciallyandlogisticallyfeasiblebyEKTAmembersthatweusealivehenratherthanalivegoat.

103

2005:815-816). Since “fragments also tend to reveal and, therefore, make available the

interstices of reading” the spectator is forced into a position of alienation and being

defamiliarised, creating a grey zone between familiarity and unfamiliarity (Markham,

2005:815-816).Withthissite-specificityandpromenadeapproachtothispiece,“multiplicity

[was]mademorepossible”and“power [was]moredistributed” (Markham2005:815-816)

with the intentionofcreatinganaffectiveandmultisensoryexperience for thespectators.

Furthermore,sincetheoutcomesofCageshadinfluencedmydecisiontoreducethedegree

of aesthetic novelty in MKMZ, there was an attempt to create an intermediary novel

experiencebasedonDocumentaryTheatrethatborrowedsomestrategiesfromImmersive

Theatre.

104

The choice of EKTA’s own premises as the site of a

multisensory aesthetic design thus became an important

sensorial strategy through which the audience was “not

separatedfromitbutinit,ofit,surroundedbyit,dwellingin

it, travelling through it” (Machon, 2013:127). Therefore,

althoughIwouldnotcallthespectatorsofMKMZspectator-

participants in the same way as Cages, the audience

members were still involved in a multi-sensorial approach

through the usage of site and through the integration of

particularinstallations:disembodiedclothesthathungdown

from the ceilings to represent massacres, graveyards that

werecreatedwithshardsofglass,whitetubesthatwerelaid

out on various passages in the building to represent the

‘minefield’ quality thatwas a thread in the interviews, and

ropes strewn on parts of the floor and hung as nooses in

other places to recall images of hangings that militants

executedduringtheheightsofKashmir’sviolence.Thespace

was “thus integratedwithin and as the world in which the

audience-participantsareimmersed”(Machon,2013:127).

Figure6:'Themanwiththehen'(EKTA&Dinesh,2014)

Figure7:Pipeslayacrossthefloor,symbolisingincarcerationandthecareneededforeverysteptaken(EKTA&Dinesh,2014).

Figure8:Stairscoveredwithbloodstainsandstyrofoam(EKTA&Dinesh,2014).

Figure9:Clotheshangfromtheceiling(behindtheactor),symbolicofmasskillings(EKTA&Dinesh,2014).

Figure10:Ropeslayacrosspassageways,symbolisingtheropeusedbyMilitantstopubliclyhangtraitors(EKTA&Dinesh,2014).

105

EKTA collaborators and I saw these strategies as supplying an aesthetic sub-text to the

interviewees’wordsand foregrounding the“ethicsofpositioning testimonial truth”within

“ananti-realistic theatrical frame” (Edmondson,2009:73).Although this surfacedconcerns

aroundwhetherMKMZwould“be interpretedasdistortingthattruthandthussabotaging

the survivors’ mission”, as Robert Skloot says of Erik Ehn’s work, these choices were

implemented with the belief that “facts have their place in law courts and official

testimoniesbut thatunderstandinghumanaction, if it canbeunderstoodatall, comes in

formsotherthantherationalandtheliteral”(inEdmondson,2009:73).

Despitetheseattemptstoaddresstheinterviewees’contentiouswordsthroughtheuseof

forensic and composed strategies, EKTA’s creatorsmaintained a fraught relationshipwith

theprocessofMKMZ.While thecreationof the threestrategiesabove– thepoet-guides,

‘the man with the hen’, the site-specificity/design -- assuaged some concerns around

performingtheinterviewees’“lies”,assomeoftheactorscalledthem,itwasapparentthat

the actors were uncomfortable with the victimised narrative that a majority of the

interviewees painted of themselves. Although an ethical obligation to the interviewees

meantthatwecouldnotalterthemainpremiseoftheverbatimtextsthatwereused,oneof

mypedagogicalchoicestoaddresstheactors’concernsmanifestedmosteffectively inone

exercise.InthisexerciseIaskedtwoofthemostsenioractorsatEKTA,whowereplayingthe

poetguides, tobecomeanchorsonaTVnewsshow inan improvisedscenario. It isworth

notingherethatitwasnotacoincidencethatthepoet-guideswerethetwooldestmembers

ofEKTA;thiswasacastingchoicethatwasmadeasthesetwoactorshadhadthemostlife

experienceatEKTAvis-à-visthemilitancyandwerebestpositionedtonuance/challengethe

monologues through the aesthetic form of the shayaris. As the TV news anchors in this

improvisation,theywereaskedtoreplicatedebatestheymighthaveseenonnewschannels

thathavethetendencyofturningintoheatedargumentswithhostandguestfightingitout

on the air. In this spirit, the talk showhostswould improvise interviewswith eachof the

charactersspeakingmonologuesinMKMZ,whowouldinturnusetheirverbatimlinesfrom

the performance to frame responses. However, in the improvisation, the news anchors

could stop the charactersmid-speech and confront themwithquestions aboutwhat they

(theTVanchors)sawtobeliesoromissionsinthemonologues–aconfrontationthatwas

not possible with the real interviewees. In this exercise therefore, the actors being

106

interviewedhad to improvise responses -- in character -- to thenewsanchors’ challenges

and predictably, this exercise soon resulted in the talk show hosts backing each of the

charactersintoacorner;inmuchthesamewaythattheex-militantintervieweesdescribed

beingconfrontedconstantlybyCivil Society.Although Iprimarilydesigned thisexercise to

useplayasameansforEKTAactorstoairtheirdiscomfortwiththeinterviewees’words,the

response toMKMZfromAudienceB (seebelow)mademequestionwhether thisexercise

shouldhavebeenscriptedandintegratedasacomposedelementinMKMZ.

Ethics,Aesthetics,Pedagogy&thePerformances

Whether or not these strategies – the poet-guides, the ‘man with the hen’, and the

setting/design elements – performed their intended effect of nuancing the

(mis)representations in the verbatim components to the performance is debatable.While

the EKTA actors’ reservations about the (mis)representations in the interviewees’ words

were generally addressed through exercises and discussions such as the one mentioned

above,wewent intothenextphaseoftheproject–ofperformingforanaudience–with

muchtrepidation.AsIunderstandit,MKMZisamongthefirstpiecesofitskindinKashmir,

bothinusingamore‘experimental’formoftheatreandinconsideringthenarrativesofEx-

militants.Therefore,giventhecareweneededtotakewithregardstoourownsafety,the

final step in this phaseof theproject involved showing thepiece to twopublics: the first

showwas for the interviewees themselves (hereon referred to as Audience A), while the

guest-listsforthesecondandthirdshowings(AudienceB)fornon-interviewees/presumably

nonEx-militantswereleftinthehandsofthedirectorsofEKTAandJKHWArespectively.

WhileneitherAudienceAnorAudienceBtookissuewiththepoet-guides,the‘manwiththe

hen’orthedesignelements inanyway,thecomplicatedresponsesthatwereceivedfrom

AudienceBmadeitseemasthoughourcomposedstrategiesdidnothavethesamepower

astheverbatimpiecesi.e.,themonologuesandtheimage-basedvignettes.Apartfromone

audiencememberinAudienceAwhotoldusthathethoughtthe‘manwiththehen’wasthe

protagonistofthepieceandahandfulofmembersfromAudienceBwhocomplimentedthe

setting/design elements, not one of the three composed aesthetic strategies seemed to

haveasmuchpowerasthespokenword.Speakingtothecomplicationsofaudienceliteracy

inthetheatre,PierreBourdieu(inShaughnessy2012:166)hasstatedthatforanaudienceto

107

whom the codes and language of a performance are unfamiliar, all that is visible is a

cacophony of sound and colour. Therefore, although we had dialled down the level of

noveltyinMKMZ(comparedtoCages),giventhatouraudienceshadbeenexposed,ifatall,

toonlyscript-basedprosceniumdrama–IwastoldbytheDirectorofEKTA–theyonlypaid

attentiontotheelementsofMKMZthattheyrecognisedi.e.,themonologues.

In line with Harold Pinter’s delineation between the artist and citizenwhen it comes to

lookingfortruthsandfalsehoods,AlisonForsythandChrisMegson(2009)havepointedout

howthereceptionofVerbatimTheatreismarkedbyapreoccupationwithwhatisrealand

what is not; or a tension that defined our spectators’ experiences in MKMZ. While the

responseswereceivedfromAudienceAweregenerallypositive,46AudienceBreactedwith

muchmoreopposition.Theconversationafteroursecondshowbecameheatedanddespite

our clarifications: (1) that MKMZ was a work-in-progress, (2) that the piece aimed to

approachthenotionofthetestimoniesbeingbothtrueandfalse,and(3)thatthecomposed

and forensic strategies strove to balance the monologues, our justifications were not

accepted by this audience of Kashmiri artists and intellectuals. I was told in no uncertain

terms thatMKMZwasapropagandapieceandvery soon, Iwasenmeshed inwhat James

Thompson(2005)considersasastrugglebetweenthedifferentaudiencesforacommunity-

based work of theatre. If our first-level audience was the interviewees themselves, how

werewe to approach this second-level audience of non-interviewees for whom the local

context was too charged to allow for any distancing? Since MKMZ presented the

interviewees’ understanding of their own victimisation, we were at the receiving end of

what Michael Balfour (2007:9) has cautioned: “if one asserts that victims should not be

constructedheroically,onerisksbeingaccusedofviolatingtheirmemory”.

Whileadistancedpositionofobservermightbepossibleinatimeof‘peace’,inatime/place

where war is current and omnipresent there were no works-in-progress, only completed

works that tooka stand. Therewereno ‘ethicsofDocumentary Theatre’ that allowed for

truths and falsehoods, there was only a choice of truths or falsehoods. There were no

composed/forensic/exceptionalstrategies thatwerepossible, just thatwhichwassaidand

thatwhichwasnot.Althoughfollow-upconversationswiththemostcriticalspectatorsfrom

46 The interviewees commentedon the integritywithwhich theirwordshadbeenportrayed,but the sub-text addedby the composedelementsstillseemedtogogenerallyunnoticed.ItalsowarrantsmentioningthatwhilecarewastakentoinviteeverysingleintervieweeforthefirstperformanceofMKMZ,onlyfouroftheoriginalcontributorscametothisperformance.

108

Audience B resulted in constructive suggestions, feedback and insights for MKMZ, the

immediatediscussionfollowingthesecondperformanceseemedtoimplicatethecreatorsof

thepiece--primarilymyselfasthedirectorandamainland‘Indian’--ashavinganagendato

simultaneouslyundermineandvictimisethemilitancy.OnespectatorfromAudienceBtook

issuewiththefactthatwehadonlyshowcased‘surrendered’militantsi.e.,peoplewhohad

somewhere along the line lost faith in their efforts orwho had joined themilitancywith

misplaced ideals and convictions. “What about the truemilitants?”heaskedus.Although

this spectator immediately accepted that most idealistic militants who have not already

beenkilledwouldrefusetospeaktosomeonelikeme,Iwasexpected(bythisspectator)to

representtheirmissingvoices.

Along similar lines of contention around (mis)representation, another spectator from

AudienceB indicated thathewasdiscomfitedbyhowmuchwehad representedwhathe

considered to be, lies. “The only truth is the truth of the victims”, he said, and the

interviewees had completelymisrepresented their actions to us. This contentionbetween

what is trueandwhat is false isallpervasivewhenspeaking tonon-dominantaccountsof

war.Forexample, inaconsiderationof IsmaelBeah’s (2007)narrativeofexperiencesasa

child-soldier inA LongWayGone, AllisonMackey (2013:102) suggests that thework “has

been haunted” by suggestions from the likes of Barbara McMahon (2008) “that Beah’s

memoir is in fact ‘factually flawed’”.Similarlymembersof theglobalRwandancommunity

havediscreditedthenarrativeofPaulRusesbagina,theprotagonistofHotelRwanda(2004),

becauseofperceivedfalsehoodsinhisstory;“thesescandalsofveracityillustratethemore

general problem of autobiography: the slippery divide between truth and fiction and the

autobiographical pact undertaken by writer and reader alike” (Mackey, 2013:102). The

explosiveandintensereactiontoMKMZbymembersofAudienceBalsoledtoarevisitingof

whatThompson (2004:151)cautions; that“withoutextremecare theatreprojects thatdig

up narratives, experiences, and remembrances can blame, enact revenge, and foster

animosityasmuchastheycandevelopdialogue,respect,orcomfort”.Whiletheapproaches

andstepsweredesignedtotakethecarethatThompsoncallsfor,AudienceB’sresponses

made it evident that the ‘caring’ choices that had been made were not effective. If we

acceptwhatHannahArendt (1981:262) says that “the veryoriginalityof theartist (or the

109

very novelty of the actor) depends onmaking himself understood by those who are not

artists(oractors)”,hadwefailedwithMKMZ?

AfurthercomplicationwasthepresenceofthedaughterofanArmedForcesBrigadierasa

performerinthepiece.Inresponsetotheyoungwoman’scollegerequirementtoundertake

aninternshipoverhersummerbreak,theBrigadier’sdaughterhadcontactedEKTAandwas

invitedbythecompany’sdirectortobecomepartofMKMZ.Asthedaughterofanarmyman

frommainland Indiawhowas stationed in Kashmir, this young lady’s presencewithin the

workshopsandperformancesaddedacross-communityelementtotheworkthatwasboth

unexpectedandcomplex;bothdesirableandundesirable.Forexample,theactress’father’s

associationwiththeArmedForcesmeantthatshealwayscametorehearsalswithanarmed

escortwho reported back to her high-ranking parent. Thereforewhile the actress herself

was affable and maintained cordial and friendly interactions with EKTA actors (and vice-

versa), both EKTA actors and I refrained from having more ‘controversial’ conversations

about the Armed Forces in her presence, choosing instead to have those conversations

before/afterherarmedescorthadbroughther to/takenheraway from the rehearsals. In

addition,sincethisyoungwomanwastheonlyfemaleparticipantintheworkshop,shewas

cast in the role of the Pakistani woman who launches into a tirade against her Kashmiri

extendedfamilyfornottreatingherwell.Whilethiscomplexitywasnotsomethingthatwas

highlightedexplicitlyeitherbytheactorsorspectators,therewasanimplicittensionhere.

SincethismonologuewasheavilycriticalofKashmirandKashmiris,itwasreadasbeingboth

anti-Pakistan47andanti-Kashmir.Therefore, thepoliticsof thisyoungwomancomingfrom

mainlandIndia,whilealsothedaughterofanarmyofficer,broughtmultiplegreylayersboth

intotheprocessandtheperformances.

Given the politics of an army officer’s daughter performing in a controversial piece like

MKMZ,thedirectorofEKTAbeganthepost-performancediscussionsbyexplicitlystatingthe

actress’militaryaffiliationtothespectators.Althoughtheactresswasinitiallyunsureasto

thenecessityofthisopenidentification,EKTA’sdirectordeemedittobeanethicalchoiceso

thataudiencememberswouldnotlatercastaspersionsastowhytheywerenottoldabout

thisyoungwoman’sArmedForceslink.Ironicallyhowever,morethanheraffiliationwithan

armyofficer, this actress’ presencewas complicatedonlywhen she responded to critique

47SinceaPakistaniwomanwascriticizingKashmir/KashmirisandtheresearcherwasfrommainlandIndia.

110

from Audience B by putting forward the idea that perpetration might be relational; a

commentthatwasnotreceivedwell.Whiletheactresstriedtostatethatweoften“failto

recognisethatthereisperhapsa‘littleperpetrator’ineachoneofus”(Foster,Haupt&De

Beer,2005:52), theaudiencememberswerenotacceptingofthisopinionatall;especially

not from someone who was not Kashmiri and who had not lived through the conflicts

herself.This ‘interchangeability’thattheactressalludedtowascontroversial formuchthe

samereasonasPeterWeiss’TheInvestigation,inwhich“theapparenttransformationofthe

prisonerintoanexecutionerwhomurdershisfatherandfriendsoffersapowerfulexample

of what some critics have interpreted as the play’s portrayal of the interchangeability of

victimsandperpetrators”(Thomas,2010:568).

We struggledwith the criticism fromAudience B andwhile I personally, found the harsh

feedbackhumblingbutnecessary,EKTAmembersseemedtofindthecriticalresponsemore

embarrassing than helpful. The second performance was therefore followed by hours of

discussionanddebate,whereweconsideredhowtoaddressthefeedbackinourfinal(third)

performancethenextday, intendedforguests invitedby JKHWA.48However, in thehours

following the performance, both the spectators from Audience B who had most vocally

expressedtheirconcernsaboutthepiecebecameourmostconstructivecollaborators.One

ofthespectators,apoet,sentusapoemthathehadwrittenaboutKashmirandsuggested

thatweadditintothepiecetogiveitmorenuance.Theotherspectator,atheatredirector,

came to EKTA’s premises the next morning and spent hours with us during our final

rehearsal;explaininghisconcernsinfurtherdetailandsuggestingeditsthatwouldmakethe

piecemore‘true’.WetookmanyofhissuggestionsonboardandtheversionofMKMZthat

wasperformedthatfinalafternoonforEKTA’sboardmembersexhibitedmanylittleandnot-

so-littleedits:

Table6:EditsmadetoMKMZ

SuggestedEdits Spectator’sReasoning

InTheIdealistMonologue,itwassuggestedthatwecuttheline“Thepeople[themilitantleaders]whowereshowingustheway,becameourlooters.”

Since this was the only monologue that presented anidealistic militant, the spectator suggested that this line’simplication – that all militant leaders were corrupt – wasincorrectandproblematic.Thereweresomeheroes,hesaid,who could not be painted with this brush. The spectator

48 Toreiterate,thefirstperformancewasforthe interviewees,thesecondforJKHWA’sguests,andthethird/fourthperformanceswereaimedatEKTAguests.

111

SuggestedEdits Spectator’sReasoning madethevalidpointthat,sincewewereinfactgeneralising

(to a large extent) the specific stories of interviewees, wehadtomakethatgeneralizationmorenuanced.

ItwassuggestedtheentireDisillusionedMonologueanditsaccompanyingsymbolicperformancebecutfromtheperformance.

Thespectatorsaidthatthiswasbecausethemonologuewasnot saying anything new. However, conversationswith theEKTAteamthedayearliersuggestedthattheproblemwiththismonologue lay in itsbeingcriticalofPakistan.“It’s fineto be critical of India”, I was told, but being critical ofPakistan when many current militants value a culturalaffiliation with the country could have possibly dangerousrepercussions for EKTA. The actor performing thismonologue said something akin to the following: “Do youthinkmilitants are going to understand that I am simply acharacter who is saying these things against Pakistan, andthat they are not my words? If a militant sees thismonologue and comes to get me, he will have shot mebefore I have the time to explain that I am only playing acharacter”.

InTheFramedMonologueitwassuggestedthatwecutoneparticularcomponent,wherethecharacternarratesthefollowingstory:

Oneeveningtherewasaknockonmydoorandtherewasamanthere.Hestayedwithusforthenight.ItwasFridaythenextdayandthen,themanheardtheazaan.Themansaid:“Theytoldmethere[inPakistan]thattherewasnoazaaninKashmir?That’swhytheysentmeheretosaveKashmir,sincenooneprayshere”.

ThemonologuethenwentontotalkabouthowthismanhadbeenframedasamilitantbytheIndiangovernmentandthathehadnoideaastowhythishadbeendonetohim.

Thespectatortookissuewiththestorysinceitsaidthattheman from Pakistan did not know that the azaan (call toprayer) happened in Kashmir. “Didn’t he cross the borderintoKashmirfromPakistan?”thespectatorasked.Andifhedid, would he not have passed through multiple Kashmirivillages en route overmultiple days and as a result, heardthecalltoprayeranumberoftimes?HowdidhegetallthewaytothecapitalofKashmirfromPakistanwithouthearingthe azaan on his way and realising his mistake? Thespectator also pointed out thatmost people had not been‘framed’ without any reason at all and that it wasdisingenuous for this character to suggest that he did notunderstandwhyhehadbeenarrested.Themanmusthavebeen arrested, the spectator said, because militants wereseen in his home. Presenting his own personal experiencewithmilitants coming into his home and demanding to befed,thespectatorsuggestedthatweeditthismonologuetoinclude a statement on theman being framed because hisvisitorwasinfactimplicatedinthemilitancy.

While EKTA actors had alluded to some of these problemswith the text during theworkshop process, they had beenunable to sequentially break down the monologues andpoint out its ‘holes’ to me (as above). Much of mycolleagues’critiqueswereframedingenericstatementslike“This is not true”, “They are lying to you”, and so on –possibly because their familiarity with me led them tobelieve that I would understand the issues without theirhaving to spell themout.Therefore,having this spectator’sspecific feedback was extremely useful to see what mycolleagues had been reacting to; reactions that I, in mydesire to be ethical to the interviewees, had only invoked

112

SuggestedEdits Spectator’sReasoningaestheticelementstoaddress.

ItwassuggestedthatTheReturnedmonologuebetoneddownsincethePakistaniwomanhurlsaccusationsatKashmirandKashmiris.Insteadofsaying“TheseKashmiris”itwassuggestedthatthecharactersay,“Thesepeople”andwhereshesaid“Kashmir,”tosay,“thisplace”.

The spectator said that despite the controversial nature ofthismonologue, itwas necessary to have a strong, critical,female voice in thepiece.Bymaking the accusationsmoregeneral though, the spectator suggested thatwewould beable to balance the contentious nature of the text.Furthermore,itissignificanttonotethatintoningdownthismonologueandincuttingTheDisillusionedpiece,themostvisible anti-Pakistan sentiments were removed from thepiece.While I had initially consideredTheReturnednot tobe anti-Pakistan but anti-Kashmir (thus creating a balancewiththeanti-Indiaandanti-Pakistanmomentsinotherpartsof MKMZ), I was told that presenting a monologue by aPakistanithatwasanti-Kashmirwouldbeinterpretedasthemonologue attempting to antagonise Kashmiris againstPakistan. This explanation clarified what some of thespectators had called ‘propaganda’ in response to theuneditedversionofMKMZ.

Thisprocessofdialogueandexchangethatinvolvedcritiqueandheateddebate,contained

anelementofwhatBazKershaw(1999:66)calls“theradical[that]arisesfromthe'excesses

ofperformance'-thesurplusmeaningsgeneratedbyperformance'sdynamicinteractionwith

itscontextandcontinuousco-productionbyperformersandspectatorsinwaysthatcannot

be directed, predicted or measured”. Kershaw (1999:18) draws on Raymond Williams'

analysisof“theradicalasbeingassociatedwith'vigorousandfundamentalchange'without

ideologicalorientation,andhewelcomes the radicalasagesture 'beyondall formsof the

dogmatic, towards kinds of freedom that cannot be envisaged”. Containing resonances of

Kershaw’s understanding of the radical therefore, the critical spectators fromAudience B

becoming MKMZ’s most constructive collaborators was akin to what Jacques Rancière

(2010:140)drawsattentiontoas“adissensualreconfigurationofthecommonexperienceof

thesensible”.Thesemomentsofdisagreementthen,madeMKMZapieceof“criticalart”–

in Rancière’s terms (2010:149) – that thrived in the transient space of “lacking a clear

political project outside thismaterialisation ofmultiple and shifting sensual fabrics of the

world”.

AlthoughtheseparticularinstancesofcriticalspectatorsfromAudienceBbecomingMKMZ’s

most constructive collaborators were radical for me, it cannot be ignored that the

contingenciesof the critique received fromAudienceBweredifferent forEKTAmembers.

113

EKTA actors were extremely concerned about how their standing in society would be

affected as a result of Audience B’s criticism – especially since those doing the criticising

werewell-knownartistsinthelocalcontext.ThedirectorofEKTAassuredmelaterthatsince

the process had become a dialogue and since the critics’ suggestions had been taken on

board, there would be no lasting negative impact on the theatre company. However,

ethically, I still contend with how MKMZ might have impacted the ways in which local

spectators see EKTA’s work. As Thompson (2003:23-24) has pointed out “a shift from

certaintiesmaybeapositiveprocessforsomecommunities,whereasareturntocertainties

maybethedesireofothers”.InthecontentiousresponsestoMKMZ,ashiftfromcertainties

wasapositiveprocess formyselfas theresearcher,butnotnecessarilysopositive for the

teamfromEKTA.

Amongthemanypoignantmoments intheprocessofMKMZ,oneof themoststriking for

me was the disappearance of the facilitator of JKHWA after the first performance for

AudienceA.Whilethefacilitatorwasoneofthemostactivemembersduringtheinterviews,

visitedmany of our rehearsals, and was our most positive audiencemember in the first

showing of MKMZ for the interviewees, his unexplained absence during the next

performances leftus–EKTAcreatorsandmyself– inastateofbewilderment.Onthefirst

dayofhisabsenceIwastoldthathehadbeenarrestedbythepoliceinthesecuritylead-up

to a ‘MartyrsDay’ demonstration thatwas to happen in Kashmir -- Ex-militants are often

arrestedondaysof significantpoliticalprotests/holidays just in case theyplan to join the

days’activities.49Ontheseconddayofhisabsenceweweretoldthathehadbeenreleased

from lock-up andwould be coming to the next performance ofMKMZ;when he did not

showupthatdayeither,orthenext,theEKTAactorsandIhadnochoicebuttocontinueour

speculationsastowhetherhisinitiallypositivefeedbacktoourworkmightnothaveactually

beenhishonestopinion.IdidnotseethefacilitatorfortherestofmytimeinKashmirthat

yearanddidnothearfromhimforaboutamonthafter I leftKashmir.Atthis juncturehe

addressed his unexplained absence/disappearance by promising to explain his absence to

me in person the next time I am in Srinagar.Until then, I remainwithmore doubts than

certainties,questioningifIwilleveridentifytheinnumerablelayerstoMKMZ.

49 ThiswassaidtobeduringanumberoftheinterviewsleadinguptoMKMZ.

114

Outcomes

TheconcludingsectioninChapterTwoputforwardthreequestionsintowhichthepractice

withMilitants/Ex-militantsinKashmirsoughttogainmoreinsight.

• WhatarethegreyzonesofMilitant/Ex-MilitantnarrativesinKashmir?

• Isaffectasufficientframingforworkthatdramatisesthenarrativesofthosewhohave

usedviolencetoanaudiencethathas/hadbeen‘victim’tothoseacts?

• Doesprocess-basedspectatorshipstillseemnecessarywhentheworkmovestoward

anintermediateratherthanextremeuseofnovelty?

Eachofthesequestionsisfurtherexploredinthisdiscussiononoutcomes, inconversation

withbothMKMZandCages.

The grey zones of Civil Society narratives in Kashmir were found to be in narratives of

relationalviolenceandinvokedaconsiderationofacts--asinthecaseofgender--thatare

notdominantnarrativesofvictimhoodinatimeandplaceofwar.Whatarethegreyzones

then,whenlookingattheKashmirimilitancy?Whilepreliminaryarticulationsofgreyzones

inthisprojectmanifestedasaconsiderationofthespacebetweenthethreegroupsofCivil

Society, Militants/Ex-militants, and the Indian Armed Forces in Kashmir, MKMZ led to a

transformation in this articulation. Rather than considering grey zones as spacesbetween

‘victim’and’perpetrator’,theworkwithex-militantsinMKMZrevealedtheshadowy/liminal

places within the category of the militancy in Kashmir -- a seemingly small shift in

articulationwhose significance is discussedmore extensively in the concluding chapter of

this thesis. The practice involved inMKMZ specifically revealed that Kashmiri Ex-militants

occupyaparticularlyuncertainterrainwithinthelargercategoryofthemilitancyinKashmir.

Giventhatthese individualsdonotseethemselvesas/arenotseenasbeingpartofeither

CivilSocietyorthemilitancy,theyinhabittheirowngreyzonesbetween(a)martyr/freedom

fighters: when considered idealistic fighters; (b) terrorist: when perceived as having

misplaced/misdirected idealism, and (d) sell-out: when perceived as being corrupt/not

idealisticenough.WhileaccessingEx-militants’narrativesthatliewithinmultiplegreyzones

therefore,itwasnearimpossibletomaintainthespaceasoneinwhich,asPrimoLevisays

(in Thomas, 2010:578), “the separation of victims and perpetrators is maintained: The

115

oppressor remains what he is and so does the victim”. MKMZ’s inability to retain this

positioningliesatthecruxofitsinterminablecomplexity.

Anadded layer to thecomplexity inMKMZemergedwhen ‘victims’ inAudienceB,whose

kithandkinhadbeenaffectedby someof theseEx-militants’ actsof violence, saw/heard

narrativesof theOtherwhichwereatoddswithwhat theyknew/what they thought they

knew.Inthisparticularcontextthen,whentheidentityofbeinga‘victim’ ispervasiveand

important to how individuals and groups situate themselves, is contradiction seen as

destabilising the very notion of that person’s identity? In presenting narratives of Ex-

militantsinaperformancelikeMKMZ,wereweaskingtoomuchofourspectatorswhowere

not part of the interview/creative process? “It is sometimes said that a person’s present

beliefs andattitudeswillmakehimshyaway fromanyeffort to learn subjectmatter that

mightchallengethem”,saysAllenTough(1971:65) intalkingaboutthechallengesofadult

learning.HoweverTough (1971:65)alsoargues thatpeopleonlyholdonto theirbeliefs to

theextent that theyhave toandthatgenerallyspeaking,all individualsare“motivatedby

thedesiretoseerealityas itactually is,evenif ithurts”.Thereare“severalexamplesofa

personsettingouttodeveloporchangehisbeliefsandattitudes”andasindividualsbecome

“more competent at goal-setting and planning, they may increasingly initiate efforts to

changetheirownbeliefsandattitudes”(Tough,1971:65)Therefore,couldMKMZ’sfriction

withAudienceBbeseen inan inabilityto locateandframeadesiretoseetheEx-militant

Otherandtheirreality“asitactuallyis”?

WhileAudienceB’s“demandforatruerimage,formoreimages,forimagesthatconveythe

full horror and reality of the suffering has its place and importance”, I agree with Judith

Butler(2004:146)that“itwouldbeamistaketothinkthatweonlyneedtofindtherightand

true images, and that a certain reality will then be conveyed”. Rather, Butler (2004:146)

says, “reality is not conveyed by what is represented with the image, but through the

challenge to representation that reality delivers”. Framed by this notion of reality being

contained in the disjuncture of representation rather than finding right answers, MKMZ

revealsoneparticularpotential–apotential inwhich“thehuman is indirectlyaffirmed in

thatverydisjunctionthatmakesrepresentationimpossible”(Butler,2004:144).Byworking

with disjunctions and contradictions therefore,MKMZ created a rupture in the encounter

betweenEx-militantarchivesandtherepertoiresofnon-ex-militants;arupturethatinusing

116

“representationtoconveythehuman”notonlyfailed,butalsoshoweditsfailure(asButler

callsfor).Inourefforttorepresentvoicesthatareun-representableinvariousways,MKMZ

embodied a potentially powerful paradox between seeking to represent Ex-militant

narrativeswhileallthewhilefailing/showingthefailureofthatattempt.

And yet this powerful paradox, while theoretically relevant and poignant, is far more

problematic when considered ethically and pedagogically: a problematic that led to a

resurgence of process-based spectatorship as an idea. While Cages had led to the

emergence of process-based spectatorship, the initial assumption was that it was the

performance’sextreme novelty thatmadeprocess-based spectatorship seemnecessary. It

was in response to this outcome that the aesthetic form of MKMZ focussed more on

DocumentaryTheatreratherthanImmersiveTheatre,toworktowardintermediatenovelty.

However when symbolic elements like the poet-guides, ‘the man with the hen’, and the

setting/designwentunread/unseenbyamajorityof thespectators, Ihad toconsider if in

the context of Kashmir, any theatrical experiment that is not the traditional folk form of

Bhand Pather is extremely novel by default. Furthermore, the various complexities to the

workshopsandperformancesofMKMZalsorevealedthatperformancesthatshowa‘single’

community perspective, unless those less contentious ‘victims’ like the women in Cages,

cannot/should not be performed for those who are outside the interview and workshop

process. Single community narratives from groups that have used violence therefore – as

AudienceB’sresponsesindicated–cannot/shouldnotbeshowntoanaudienceunlessthey

are guided by a process which gives them tools to decode the performance. Therefore

althoughMKMZmighthavebeenlessnovelinitsaestheticformthanCages,thenoveltyof

the content still outweighed that of the form; reemphasising the need for a guided

spectatorshipprocess.Theimportanceofprocess-basedspectatorshipinKashmirtherefore,

especiallywhenthereisamainlandtheatremakerinvolved,seemsnotjustpreferable,but

essential.WhileCagesconsideredthisprocessforspectatorsasincludingimprovisationand

role-play exercises that would prepare spectators to take on roles in immersive

environments, processes for spectators for a piece such as MKMZ would need to entail

sessionson:(a)toolstoread/interpretimages;(b)scenariosofstructuredimprovisation,like

theoneusedwithEKTAactorsinvolvingtheTVnewsanchors,thatwouldprovidespectators

with frameworks to disagree with the characters; (c) an introduction to Documentary

117

Theatre that includes details onhow intervieweeswere chosen, how the interviewswere

designed, and how transcriptswere edited; (d) finally, an integral element in designing a

process-basedspectatorshipforapiecelikeMKMZwouldinvolveaframingoftheintentions

ofthecreators.

Although thequestionof intentionhademergedduringCages, in the interactionwith the

journalist for example, my intentions with a project like MKMZ were more rigorously

scrutinised.WhileCages’affectiveobjectivesseemedtoassuagespectators’concernsmore

readily, the concept of affect was insufficient a response for spectators who asked for a

clarificationofmyintentionwithMKMZ.Speakingtothenopointofaffectandthedesired

unpredictabilityinthewebsofsignificancethatmightemergefromMKMZdidnotseemto

resonatewithspectatorsortheEKTAco-creatorsthemselves.Oneoftheactorsforinstance,

after the critical response fromAudienceB,expressed this response: ‘Ifmilitants come to

ourshowandhear themonologue inwhich IcriticisePakistan,doyouthink that theyare

goingtounderstandthatthisisaplayandIamplayingapart?No.They’llshootmebeforeI

haveachancetoexplainmyself’.Creatingunpredictablewebsofsignificanceandaffective

responses therefore, especially when invoking the controversial voices of those who are

considered ‘perpetrators’, affect seemed insufficient to frame an outside theatre

practitioner’s intentionality. Although the spectators’ not understanding/approving of its

sufficiencydoesnottakeawayfromthelegitimacyofaffectasaconcept,itwasatthispoint

intheprojectthatIbegantoseethenecessityformorepointsontheaffect/effectspectrum

through which a theatre practitioner might frame the intentionality of the work. This

affect/effect spectrum is further elucidated in the Conclusions, as one of the primary

outcomesofthisresearchproject.

Withthesevariousoutcomesaroundaffect,process-basedspectatorship,andgreyzonesin

mind, this thesisnowmoves to the finalphaseof thedoctoralproject: a considerationof

narrativesfromIndianArmedForces’troopsstationedinKashmir.Whiletheinitialideahad

been to design the practice around devised theatre workshops and their resulting

performances,ChapterFourdiscussesthewaysinwhichthestrategieshadtobereinvented

in response to multiple unsuccessful attempts to engage with soldiers in the practice of

creatingandperformingtheatre.

118

CHAPTERFOUR:WAITING…&THEARMEDFORCES

Not all silences come from a sense of being silenced. Butmany do. Regardless of thecause, silences rob thepublicof ideas,of thechance tocreatebondsofunderstandingandmutualtrust(Enloe,2004:70).

Thisproject’sattemptstoreachouttotheIndianArmedForcesinKashmirwereframedby

various silences; silences that led to strategies having to be reinvented and rearticulated.

Although the Colonel’s presence as a spectator-participant in Cages and the Brigadier’s

daughter’s presence inMeri Kahani Meri Zabani (MKMZ) created poignant in-roads with

regardstothecross-communitycomponent,attemptstoworksolelywiththeIndianArmed

Forcesusingdevisedtheatreworkshops,aswithEx-militantsandCivilSociety,resultedina

numberof failedattempts.Ultimately therefore, thisphase in the researchhad to relyon

the ideaof “bricolage” thatwaspresented inChapterTwo (Barrett&Bolt,2007:127)and

involveda combinationof strategies. It is important to clarifyat theoutsethowever, that

thiswritingdoesnotseektoprovideafactualovervieworhistorical timelinesvis-à-visthe

IndianArmedForces’presenceand interventions inKashmir.Nevertheless,althoughthere

were noworkshops and performances in this phase of thework aswith Civil Society and

Militants/Ex-militants in Cages and MKMZ respectively, there were many personal

encounters between myself and the Armed Forces in Kashmir. Using these personal

encounters as auto-ethnographic moments of insight, alongside archival research of

publicallyavailablematerial,thebricolageinthischapterhasbeenstructuredasfollows:

1) The Image of the Soldier: A consideration of the soldier/non-soldier50 dynamic in

Kashmir which puts forward how the Armed Forces seek to perform their

relationship to the localcontext, incontrastwith thedominantnarratives thatone

encountersinthemediaandeverydayinteractionsontheground

2) The Silence of the Soldier: Auto-ethnographic accounts of my attempts to work

directlywith the Armed Forces in Kashmir and the subsequent outcomes of those

attempts

50 Iuse the term ‘non-soldier’ rather than the term ‘civilian’ tohighlight thepresenceofMilitants/Ex-militantswithin the realmofCivilSocietyandthus,tounderscorethemurkinessoftheterm.

119

3) TheMakingoftheSoldier:Analysesofmyresearchworkwithmilitarycadetsatthe

NationalDefenceAcademy(NDA)inwesternIndia,alongsideaconsiderationofthe

various performances that educate/train the soldier who is (eventually) posted in

placeslikeKashmir

In choosing which elements to showcase in this bricolage, there was one fundamental

questionthatwasasked:howwillthisinformationbepertinentforatheatricalperformance

thatseekstoinvolvenarrativesfromtheArmedForcesinKashmir?

TheImageoftheSoldier

ThecurrentdynamicsinKashmirbetweentheArmedForcesandCivilSocietymightbestbe

described by what Carolyn Nordstrom (2004:166) calls “a time of not-war-not-peace… a

political reality [that]wedonothave aname for”. Talking about times inwhich “military

actionsoccur that in andof themselveswouldbe called “war”or “low-intensitywarfare,”

Nordstrom(2004:166-167)arguesthat insomesituationstheseactionsarenot labelledas

such“becausetheyarehiddenbyapeaceprocessnoonewantstoadmitisfailing”.Insuch

instances“actsofwararecalled‘policeactions’,‘banditry’,‘accidents’ortheyaresimplynot

calledanythingatall—theyaresilencedinpublicdiscussion”.InKashmir,‘encounters’isthe

termthatisusedbyallpartiestorefertooffensivesoftheArmedForcesagainstthosewho

are considered as threats, sometimesdescribed as being legitimate and at other times as

‘fake’. In this context of not-war-not peace, the Indian Armed Forces and Kashmiri Civil

Societyare“oldacquaintances”(Fanon,2004:28)andassuch,inhabitasettinginwhich“the

goodissimplythatwhichisevilfrom'them'”(Fanon,2004:39).CallinguponFrantzFanon’s

(2004:89)descriptionoftherelationshipbetweenthe“countrypeople”andthe“townsman”

inpost-colonial contexts, there is a resonance tobe foundwith the relationshipdynamics

betweenmany51Kashmiriciviliansand IndianArmedForcespersonnel inthevalley. Inthe

Kashmiri context, “thecountrypeople [civilians]are suspiciousof the townsman [soldier]”

since the soldier dresses in, and is representative of, an authoritarian power that many

Kashmirisoppose(Fanon,2004:89).Similarly,thesoldierisassuspiciousofthecivilianwho

embodies an often hostile Other and in this fraught dynamic of settler/native,

51Isay‘manyKashmiris’andnotjust‘Kashmiris’becauseIcannotsayingoodfaithsaythatallKashmirisfeelthisway.However,inmylastfew years of working in Kashmir, there are perhaps two people amongst themany that I havemetwho have expressed any positivesentimentstowardtheArmedForces.

120

outsider/insider, coloniser/colonised, the soldier/non-soldier dynamic is not only about

antagonism that is based on political and ideological differences. Rather, the soldier (the

settler) is seen as excluding the Kashmiri (the native) from various social and economic

advantagesthatprovidethesoldier/settler/townsmanwithunequalledpowerandprivilege.

Fanon’spostulationson thesettler/native relationshipand itsapplications toKashmiralso

findsresonancewithexistingscholarshipaboutcivil-militaryrelations.Inhis1957bookThe

SoldierandtheState,SamuelP.Huntingtondescribesthedifferencesbetweenthemilitary

and civilian worlds as a contrast between attitudes and values between the two groups,

whereeachworldoperateswithitsownrules.TheprimaryquestionforHuntingdonisabout

findingawayforthe‘liberal’civilianworldtomaintainitsdominanceofthemilitaryworld

that is supposed to be in service of Civil Society. Morris Janowitz (1960) agrees with

Huntington about separate military and civilian worlds but differs in his conclusions by

offeringa“theoryofconvergence”whicharguesthatratherthanoneworlddominatingthe

other,theworldsofthecivilianandthemilitarywilleventuallyconvergeina“civilianization

ofthemilitaryoramilitarizationofsociety”.InKashmir,itmightbesaidthatitisJanowitz’s

convergencetheorythathascometodefinethecivil-militarydynamic; inthemilitarisation

of Civil Society that is evident in multiple performative ways: most obviously in the

placement of army bunkers and checkpoints along all public spaces; an employment of

spatial politics that affects every quotidian experience on the streets of Kashmir. Such a

considerationofhowKashmirhasbecome/ismilitarisedisanimportantelementtoconsider

whenlookingathowsoldier/non-soldierbinariesisperformed.

The gaps between government troops and civilians in the United States (US) have been

documentedby“astrikingculturalgapin interviewswithMarines”,whoupontheirreturn

home from training camps, seem to “experience a private loathing for public America”

(Rahbek-Clemmensen et al., 2012:671-672). Harbouring judgment toward “the physical

unfitness of civilians, by theuncouthbehaviour theywitnessed, andbywhat they sawas

pervasive selfishness and consumerism”, the Marines’ distaste of civilian cultures points

toward a polarisation betweenmilitary life, “which exhorts unity, discipline, and sacrifice,

and the civilian life of individuality, hedonism, and self-gain” (Rahbek-Clemmensen et al.,

2012:671-672).ThevaluejudgmentsthatareimposedbygovernmenttrainedArmedForces

onCivilSocietyareconstantlyreinforcedsince“everymomentofarecruit’sexistenceinthe

121

Armyaffirms thisabsolutedifference, throughaseriesofperformances”,which“establish

life as a soldier as fundamentally different, even opposite to, life as a civilian” (Gill,

2009:144).ThisdichotomousrelationshipbetweenArmedForcespersonnelandCivilSociety

is further complicated because of a “heterogeneity of connections to the military in the

civilianpopulation”(Krueger&Pedraza,2012:392).Fromhavingnopersonalacquaintances

in the Armed Forces in Kashmir, to having family members who are part of the Armed

Forces,tohavinghadexperienceswithtorture/imprisonment,definetheirexperiencewith

Indian troops, these varying relationships makes it apparent that “grouping all civilians

togetheroverlooksthesedifferencesbecauseitassumescommonexposuretothemilitary”

(Krueger&Pedraza,2012:392).

In speaking to these varying relationships, the soldier/non-soldier dynamic in Kashmir is

perhaps most in the grey when we look at Kashmiris who are part of the Indian Armed

Forces.Fanon(1986:9)speakstosuch individualsasbeing“native-with-settlerpolitics”,by

puttingforwardtheideathat“intheFrenchcolonialarmy,andparticularlyintheSenegalese

regiments,theblackofficersservefirstofallasinterpreters.They[were]usedtoconveythe

master’sorderstotheirfellows,andtheytooenjoyacertainpositionofhonor”.PrimoLevi

(in Thomas, 2010:573) exposes the problematic of Fanon’s “native-with-settler” politics in

thecontextof theHolocaustbyputting forwardanecdotesofasoccergamebetweenthe

high-rankingGermanofficersandlowerrankingJewishofficers,whomightbeinterpretedas

natives-with-settler ideologies. Levi speaks tobothsidesperforming in thegame,as if the

eventweresuspendedoutsideof thecontextof thecampand illustrates thegreyzoneof

ambiguityinwhichvictimsandperpetratorsoftenbecome“boundtogetherbythedefiling

link of coerced complicity” (Thomas, 2010:565). This coerced complicity between Armed

Forces and Civil Society is one that has been given some attention by the “classic

counterinsurgency theorists, Frank Kitson and Robert Thompson” who, in “discussing

colonial campaigns in Malaya, Oman, Kenya and Northern Ireland, both stress the

importanceof civil-military cooperation in thebattle towin the 'hearts andminds' of the

public and isolate insurgents from public support” (Hughes, 2011:66). Speaking to “overt

usesofperformance”that“includethecommissioningofmediaandculturalprojectsaspart

of civil-military cooperation and army propaganda campaigns in Malaya”, many of these

122

operations engage “theatrical performance [to project] positive images of the regime”

(Hughes,2011:66)towardcreatingvaryingdegreesofcoercedcomplicity.

Applying the abovementioned notions of coerced complicity and Armed Forces

performancestogarnerpublicsupportinthecontextofKashmir,itisnecessarytoconsider

theDoctrineonMilitaryPsychologicalOperations(inKak,2013).Adocument“thataimsto

createa‘conduciveenvironment’forthearmedforces”whoarestationedinconflictzones

around the Indian nation-state, this doctrine provides guiding principles for “activities

related to perception management” (Kak, 2013). The Indian Armed Forces’ efforts to

manage perceptions, as a result, invoke a number of strategies that seek to perform a

positive relationshipbetween soldier andnon-soldier inKashmir. For example,perception

managementhasmeantadvertisingmessagesonbillboards,asbelow,thatare“putupby

theIndianmilitaryaftereveryfewkilometers”(Kak,2013):

- Forhelp,pleasecallthisnumber...[Courtesy:XYZBattalion]

- CRPF52:Withyou,foryou.

- CRPF:Peacekeepersofthenation.

- Yoursecurityisourpriority.Ouronlyaimisyoursecurity.

- Weneedyourcooperation.

- Thankyouforyourcooperation.

- Withcompliments,fromCRPF

In addition to this simple strategy adopted by the Armed Forces to advertise a positive

soldier/non-soldier relationship; a particularly relevant article in India’s acclaimedOutlook

magazine elucidates the perception management efforts as performed by one particular

officer: InDecember2010,whenLieutenantGeneralHasnain“tookchargeoftheSrinagar-

based15Corps”intheKashmirValley,heissaidtohavedeclared2011tobethe“Yearof

theKashmiriAwam(People)duringwhichthearmywoulddevoteitselftothewelfareofthe

people and be more humane” (Dogra, 2011). An example of a performative strategy

undertakenbyHasnainmightbe seen inhis changing the army slogan from “Jawan53 aur

awam,amanhaimuqam”54 toone thatput ‘awam’before ‘jawan’ tobecome ‘Awamaur

52 CRPFisanacronymfortheCentralReservePoliceForce.53 Jawan isthetermusedtorefertoajuniorsoldierwhohasnotrisentotheranksofanOfficerintheIndianArmedForces.It isworthmentioning that jawans occupy a lower status in Armed Forces ranks, since attaining this position is seen as requiring lesseducation/intelligence– anobservation that emerged in conversationswith this researcher’s contacts inKashmir and in theworkwithmilitarycadetsatNDA.54Translatesto“forthejawanandthepeople,peaceisthegoal”(Dogra,2011).

123

jawan,amanhaimuqam’ (Dogra, 2011). In addition to linguistic changes in army slogans,

Hasnainissaidtohavebeen“meticulousinputtingthedoctrineintoaction”byinstitutinga

“Ji Janaab (Yes Sir)” approach, “where army units coming into Kashmir are administered

basic familiarisation capsules” (Dogra, 2011). In these familiarisation capsules, Hasnain is

saidtointeractwithsoldiersinincomingunitsonhowtheymightperformtheirsoldieringin

culturallysensible/sensitiveways.Forexample,hisinstructionsaresaidtobeasfollows:that

troops“mustadoptan‘aapovertum’policy”i.e.,theformal‘you’versustheinformal‘you’

inHindi/Urdu;thattroops“mustaddressKashmiriswithapolite‘janaab’or‘begum’(Siror

Madam)whenorderingpeopletogetdownfromavehicleforasecuritycheckorsearching

their houses”; that troops must “avoid racing over puddles to avoid splashing water on

pedestrians” (Dogra, 2011) – the images below showcase how these efforts are then re-

performedinthemedia,towardlargertargetaudiencesacrosstheIndiansub-continent.

Figure11:“Gamechanger:AKPLpracticematchin

Srinagar”(Dogra,2011)

Figure12:“Jadukijhappi55:Huggingalocalata

sunwaiinBadgamdistrict”(Dogra,2011)

Table7:Extracts(Dogra,2011)

“He encourages us to voice our gila-shikvas56.He listens and acts. Handwara’s people haveappreciatedthatagenerallikehimhascometoour level.” Abdur Rashid, Handwara Traders’Association

“He said many things at these meetings thatgeneralsdon’ttalkabout.Forthefirsttime,thearmycameout inpublicdomainwithacivilianface.”Gul Ahmed, Pol Science prof at KashmirUniversity

“Ithinkthearmyisfinallytryingtounderstandproblems. Ithelps inshapingresponsesthoughit alone can’t resolve an issue which ispolitical.”JavedIqbal,Politicalcommentator

“It’soddthateventhoughheheadsthearmyinKashmir, people see him more as acompassionate friend rather than an armyofficer.”Rabia Baji All India Centre for Rural &UrbanDevelopment

“Itwas strange to hear an army officer talk ofhumanrightsviolations.Ifeltthatthearmytoowas introspecting and it was laudable.”DilafrozeQazi,Peaceactivist

“We have no heroes to look up to today. NotOmar Abdullah,57 or the separatists.We’d likethe army to truly change colours and becomeour heroes.”Ajaz Ahmed, Lecturer in Srinagarcollege

55Translatesto“Themagicofahug”.56Translatesto“complaints”.57TheChiefMinisterofJammuandKashmiratthetime.

124

Chander Suta Dogra (2011) also speaks to a “series of seminars inside the Badami Bagh

cantonment where civilians, students, academics and NGOs were invited to speak out”.

DescribingstudentswhoaskedHasnainuncomfortablequestionsabout theArmedForces’

violationsinKashmir,theLieutenantGeneral issaidtohave“hadtheboysandgirlseating

outofhishandwhenhecongratulatedthemonspeakingtheirmind”.Dogra(2011)further

suggeststhatthe“veryboyswhomighthavebeentemptedtopeltstonesatarmymenlast

summernowthrongedHasnainforautographsaftertheevent,posedforpictureswithhim

and asked him for help to get into the army”. Such accounts of the soldier/non-soldier

dynamic in Kashmir are clearly incomplete, since they do not address the contradiction

betweentheseinstancesofperceptionmanagementandothernarrativesthatspeaktothe

hostility of the relationship between soldiers and non-soldiers. These contradictory views

mightbestbeencapsulatedbytakingaversefromthepoemcontributedtoMKMZbyoneof

our critical spectators from Audience B, that said: “Jo wardi walay janta ka, ab haath

batatayrehtehein;unhe logonsehargharka, ikhaathkata,tohuskakya?”–“Thearmy

menwhonowextendtheirhandstoKashmir’scommonman,ifthosesamemenhavealso

choppedahandineveryKashmirihousehold,whatofthat?”

I’ve tried to stop them, I try to control the situation. I can’t. None of us commanderscan—thoughgodknowssomedon’ttry.Thetroopsjusttakeoff likethisandthere’snostopping them.We can’t discipline them.We can’t prosecute them.We can’t dismissthem—we’dhavenoarmyleftifwedid(Nordstrom,2004:71-72).

What are the causes of this hostile relationship between the Armed Forces and many

individuals/groups in the local context? The dominant narrative surrounding the Indian

ArmedForcesinKashmiristhatofthesoldierasa‘perpetrator’ofhumanrightsviolations–

acts of violence against women; accusations of torture meted out to civilians; fake

encounters and unsubstantiated arrests, among other accusations. In a meeting with a

Colonel stationed in Kashmir, the sameColonelwhowas a spectator-participant toCages

and subsequently invited EKTA to perform for troops in Srinagar, it seemed that this

particular officer was in agreement with the Sri Lankan army commander quoted by

Nordstromabove.TheColonelindicatedthatthesoldiers,whocommitactsofrape,torture,

andotherkindsofviolence,formasmallofnumberofrenegades/soldiers-gone-rogue;who

tarnishtheimageoftheIndianArmedForcesasawhole.

125

IninformalconversationswithothermembersoftheArmedForces,itwasindicatedtome

that it is the ‘uneducated’ soldiers who commit such violations. By ‘uneducated’, these

accountsusually refer to the jawans; footsoldierswhoareseenasnothavingtoundergo

the same rigorous training as their officer counterparts, who graduate from Military

Academies.Insuchascenariothen,soldierswhoare‘uneducated’andthus,areimpliedas

being from lower socio-economic backgrounds, are seen as not having the ‘gentlemanly’

attributesoftheirmorehighlyeducatedofficerswhotendtocomefromupperechelonsof

the socio-economic spectrum. These class politics in turn become implicated in how

accusationsofunjustified/unsubstantiated/illegalactsofsoldieringare justified,dismissed,

orshroudedinsilencebytheIndianmilitaryestablishment.Thesheerproliferationofmedia

accountsregardinghumanrightsviolationsbytheArmedForcesinKashmirresonateswith

writings about the war in Vietnam -- that when a majority of the civilian population

disapprovesofthemilitary’sactions“nodistinction”ismade“betweenthewarriorandthe

war”; anyone who went to Vietnam became “part of the war machine” (Taft-Kaufman,

2000:17). Similarly, it seems tohave come to apoint in the conflicts of Kashmir,where a

distinctionisnolongermadebetweenthewarriorandthewar.AnymemberoftheIndian

ArmedForcesisseenasbeingpartofthewarmachineandalthoughmicro-levelexceptions

often occur, like the Brigadier’s daughter participating in MKMZ and the Colonel’s

interactions with EKTA, these exceptions are not visible outside private spaces i.e., at a

macro-level.

In considering the factors that motivate soldiers to fight in such hostile circumstances,

Nordstrom(2004:75)postulates thatwhile“militarycommanders [generally]actaccording

tonationaltacticalandideologicalparadigms,themotivationsofgroundsoldiersareharder

todecipher”.Forthesegroundsoldiers,theirparticipationinthewarisamixof“[p]ersonal

ideas of violence, interpersonal loyalties and antipathies, individual gain, and responses

(often spontaneous and unreasoned) to immediate threats more than generalized

conceptions of political conviction” (Nordstrom 2004:75). For these ground soldiers in

Kashmirthen,forthejawans,itmightbesaidthattheiractsofsolderingand/orunjustified

actsof‘perpetration’“becomeinfusedwiththeparticularlifehistoriesandpersonalitiesof

the soldiers themselves and the local sociocultural traditions in which they operate”

(Nordstrom,2004:75).Inthefaceofthisexplosivemixofthepersonalandthenational,itis

126

perhapsnosurprisethattherearemanyemergingnarrativesthathighlightsoldiers’(lackof)

psychological well-being in the Indian Armed Forces. For example, in a 2010 report (in

Rashid,2014),aparliamentarycommitteemaintainedthatthereweresixhundredandthirty

fivecasesreportedofsuicideorattemptedsuicideintheIndianArmedForcesfrom2003to

2007.Itwasfurtherstatedthatallthesesuicidesmightbe"attributabletoincreasedstress

environment leading to psychological imbalance in the soldiers" (Rashid, 2014).

Furthermore,therehavealsobeenmultipleinstancesofwhatarecalled‘fratricides’,where

a soldier kills others around him (usually other soldiers) before taking his own life – the

image below sets out a timeline of suicides and fratricides among the Armed Forces in

Kashmir:

127

Figure13:AtimelineoffratricideinKashmir(Rashid,2014)

Dr Khurshid-ul-Islam, a behavioural scientist at the Institute of Management and Public

AdministrationinSrinagar,says,“thatfatiguemaybeonecrucialreasonfortherecentrise

in suicidesand fraternal killings” (Hamid,2006). Inaddition,DrKhurshidbelieves that the

proliferationofmedia informationabouttheoutsideworldmight leadtosoldiersfeelinga

strong sense of disconnection between themselves and those they are supposed to be

serving.Someofficialsaresaidtohaveconcededthat,“theongoingwarinKashmiristaking

its toll on troops, who are reportedly increasingly questioning their role in the conflict”

(Hamid,2006).Ahealthworkerworkingonpsychiatric issues inJ&K“attributestherecent

128

increaseinstresslevelsnotjusttotheenvironmentofchronicconflict,butalsotothecold

weather,longworkinghoursandfrustratingbureaucracy”(Hamid,2006).Nowthatthestep

hasbeentakenbytheArmedForcestoadmittherolethatstressplaysintheexperienceof

theirsoldiersinthehostileKashmiricontext,thehealthworkersuggests“arestructuringof

duty hours and vacations, incorporating counselling as a part of mandatory training,

educatingsoldiersonwhatstresssignalstowatchforinpeers,andadministeringpersonality

testsbeforeplacementinhigh-riskstations”(Hamid,2006).Furthermore,theArmedForces

inrecentyearsaresaidtohavesetuphelplinesandyogaclassestohelpsoldiersdealwith

stressandPublicRelationsofficerssaythat,“Yogahasworkedwondersfortroops”(Hamid,

2006).Further,theArmedForcesare“alsoplacingemphasisonstrengtheningofficer-soldier

relationships”, have employed “entertainment techniques”, and in some cases, “whenwe

feel thatasoldier isnotshowingsignsof improvement,weseekthehelpofpsychiatrists”

(Hamid,2006).Oneparticularexampleofanattempttoemploy“entertainmenttechniques”

with troops, while also providing some perspective on the soldier/non-soldier dynamic,

might be found in EKTA’s 2013 performance at the Badamibagh Cantonment (BB’Cant) in

Srinagar. As mentioned in Chapter Two, the Colonel – as a result of his immersion as a

participant-spectatorinCages--formedanindependentrelationshipwithEKTAandinvited

them to perform at BB’Cant. In addition to this collaboration becoming an unexpected,

affective“webofsignificance”(Thompson,2003:70)thatemergedasaresultofthisdoctoral

project), a poignant point of consideration is the performance that EKTA chose for this

event.

Trunouve(Yasir&EnsembleKashmirTheatreAkademi,2013) isanEKTAproductionthat is

created in the Kashmiri folk tradition of Bhand Pather. While a brief overview of Bhand

Pathercanbefoundintheintroductorychapter,itisworthexploringthisformfurthersoas

tounderstandtherelevancebehindEKTA’schoicetoperformTrunouveatBB’Cant.Bhand

PatherisaKashmirifolkforminwhichperformerstravelfromplacetoplaceandincorporate

dance,Sufimusic,andpuppetryinadditiontodramaticdialogues.“TheBhandsperformina

varietyofspaces,whichincludeterracedmaizefields,shrinecourtyards,andonthestreets.

Humor is vital to Bhand Pather; in fact, theword ‘Bhand’ itself derives from the Sanskrit

band,meaning‘joke’,andthespiritofcomedyinfusesthisfolktheatre”(Menon,2013:158-

159).Thecruxofperformances thatuse theBhandPather form, likeTrunouve, lies in the

129

dramatisation of conflicts between those who are caught in asymmetrical power

relationships.Althoughprops anddesign elements inBhandPather are sparse, “themost

commonlyusedpropisthekoddar,awhipthatmakesanastylashingsound”--achoicethat

“isnot incidental”sincethewhipcomestorepresent“thephysical lashingandhumiliation

thatoppressedKashmiri subjectsexperienceunder theheavy-handed ruleof their foreign

oppressors”(Menon,2013:159).Byemployingsatireandasubversiveapproachtocomedy

therefore,pieceslikeTrunouveemploylaughterasastrategytomock“theroyaloppressor”

andtopoke“holesintohisimperturbablekinglyfacade,anddestabilizesandmakesvisible

thecracks inhisclaimtoauthority” (Menon,2013:162).Theseelementsofsubversionare

onlyfurthernuancedbytheuseofthe“phirkath, literallytwistedtalk,styleofdialogue;a

rhetorical device that utilizes coded and cryptic idioms” and which enables “the folk

performers to use ostensibly innocuous comedy to deliver pointed indictments of

contemporarysociety”(Menon,2013:163).

TheabovementionedcharacteristicsandcodesofBhandPathersuggestthatEKTAchoseto

perform Trunouve at BB’Cant, rather than their more overtly political performances that

criticise theArmed Forces, so as to “use localmetaphors” (Menon, 2013:163) thatwould

makeitextremelydifficultfortheirpredominantlynon-Kashmiriaudiencetofollow.Thisuse

of rhetorical and coded language therefore, “enables the Bhand Pather to critique their

oppressiverulers,whileatthesametimedisavowinganyobvious, immediatereferenceto

political events” (Menon, 2013:163). In so doing, pieces likeTrunouve foster “an intimate

bondandsenseofcommunityamongthosewho‘get’thejoke”(Menon,2013:164),whichin

this case would be the EKTA performers and Kashmiris in the audience. Since strategies

employedbyBhandPathercreate“alinebetweentheinsidersandtheoutsidersandfosters

an active sense of belonging within the audience” (Menon, 2013:164), EKTA’s choice to

performTrunouveatBB’Cantrevealssubversionalongsideawillingnesstocrosscommunity

boundaries.ThecodedqualitytoTrunouvemightalsobeseenasawayinwhichEKTAcould

stave off possible negative repercussions and critiques from those who might see a

performancefortheIndianArmedForcesasbeing‘pro-India’.

Extrapolatingfromtheabovementionedideas,itmightbesaidthatatheatricalperformance

thatseekstoinvolvetheIndianArmedForcesinKashmirneedstobecognisantofmultiple

dimensionsthatmouldthepresenceofsoldiersintheValley:theproblematicsettler/native

130

orcoloniser/coloniseddynamic;thewaysinwhichtheArmedForcesperformtheirattempts

at perception management; the counter narratives that are found in acts that soldiers

perpetrate; the murky zone of fratricides, and finally, the strategies of subversion that

enableCivilSocietyandArmedForcesmemberstocometogetherininfinitesimalinstances

of a shared event. Building on these ideas, there are two dramatic representations that I

wouldliketohighlighthere,preciselyfortheirattemptstoaddresssomegreyzonesinthe

experienceoftheArmedForcesinKashmir:AbhishekMajumdar’s(2014)playTheDjinnsof

EidgahandEKTA’s(Yasir&EnsembleKashmirTheatreAkademi,2014)productionofCountry

withoutaPostOffice (CWOPO). In the former,Majumdarwritesabout two Indiansoldiers

who, while guarding a deserted cemetery in Kashmir, attempt to reconcile with their

contentiouspresence in theValley–acomplexnegotiationthatculminates in thesoldiers

takinguparmsagainsteachotheramidstanencroaching,hostilemob.WhileMajumdar’s

playembodiessomeof thegreyzonesseen inan individual soldier’s struggles inKashmir,

CWOPOpresentsgreyzonesvis-à-visthesoldier/non-soldierrelationship.AlthoughCWOPO

placesanemphasisonvariouskindsofviolationsthatarecommittedbythe IndianArmed

Forces,towardstheendofthepiece,wewitnessayoungKashmirimanhesitantlyapproach

anarmybunker.Approachingthebunkerwithtrepidation,theyoungmantellsthesoldier

that hehas been called for an audition at a drama school inmainland India and that the

monologueshehasto learnforthisauditionarewritten inHindi–ascriptthathecannot

read.Couldthesoldierreadthemonologuetohim,theyoungmanasks,sothathemight

transcribe thewords inUrdu? This scene in CWOPOendswith the soldier and the young

manseatedside-by-side,workingonthemonologue.Builtonthepersonalexperienceofan

EKTAactor,thisparticular instanceinCWOPOalludestoonemicrocosmicgreyzoneinthe

soldier/non-soldier relationship in Kashmir,where the ‘perpetrator’ is seen as/behaves as

something Other. And yet, it must be added here EKTA has yet to perform CWOPO in

Kashmir and has only toured the performance outside the Valley; the implication of

humanising the Indiansoldier in thecontextofKashmir isoneofwhichEKTA isextremely

consciousandwary.Nevertheless,informedbyworkslikeTheDjinnsofEidgahandCWOPO,

which seek tonuance theArmedForces’ perspective; alongsidemypersonalobservations

of/archival research into the soldier/non-soldier dynamic in Kashmir, thereweremultiple

attemptsmadeaspartofthisprojecttoengagemoredirectlywiththeArmedForces.Itisto

theseattemptsthatthisdiscussionwillnowturn.

131

TheSilenceoftheSoldier

During the process of Cages, I was introduced to a Colonel stationed in Kashmir who

ran/runs the Intelligence Warfare efforts of the Indian Armed Forces that, among other

things,workswith thenotionof softpower.AsSoumyanetraMunshi (2013:264) says, the

goalofthisdivisionoftheArmedForcesinKashmirmightbeunderstoodashavinggoalsto

increase Kashmiris’ “allegiance for India” by concentrating on “bettering the other

components that contribute towards a positive preference for India, that is all the things

thatmakeagoodlife(likeviableeconomicopportunities,politicalopenness,etc.)”.Aspart

ofthislargergoal,theColonelsawtheatreasbeingabletocarveaspacewithintheArmed

Forcestofoster,whathetermed,“culturaleducation”.Giventhatmanyofthesoldierswho

arestationedinKashmircomefromoutsidetheregioninquestion,theColonelseemedto

thinkthatitwasthroughprocessesofartandtheatrethatthesesoldiersmightbesensitised

as to theirperformancesof their cultural (in)sensibilities inKashmir.TheColonel couldbe

seenasdrawing fromwhat theUnited States callsOperationsOther ThanWar that force

“soldierstodomuchmorethanfight” (Gill,2009:146).There isnow, internationally,acall

forsoldierswhonotonlyaretrainedtofight,butwhoalso“speakthelanguage,moveeasily

within the society, and are more likely to understand the population’s interests” (Gill,

2009:146-147). Therefore, cultural education and cultural literacy have become added

requirements in the contemporary warfare setting, “to foster development of effective

governancebyalegitimategovernment”via“establishingsecurityforthecivilianpopulace”

bywinning“thebattle[for]people’sminds”(Gill,2009:146-147).Inordertoeffectivelycarry

outtheseobjectives,therehasbeenafocusbyvariousnationstoequiptheirtroops“with

thenecessarytoolstointeract,communicate,understand,andcontrol”(Gill,2009:147)local

populations.

Inlightoftheseethicallycomplexobjectives,andinordertoestablishsomeunderstanding

ofwhat theColonelmeantby ‘cultural education’ in theKashmiri context, a first attempt

wasarticulated.WhiletheColonelinitiallyagreedtothisproposalforanartist-in-residence

programme,myattemptwaslatermetwithmonthsofsilenceandultimately,didnotoccur.

ThisinitialattemptwasthenfollowedbyasecondproposalthatwascreatedattheColonel’s

behest. In this request, I was asked to design a project as part of the annual Integration

Tours that are fundedand conductedby the IndianArmedForces forKashmiri civilians in

132

liaisonwithorganizationsinmainlandIndia.Forexample,Kashmirifarmersaresponsoredto

visit farmers in Punjab (a state in northern India), where the Punjabi farmers share

successful farming techniques with their Kashmiri counterparts. In this vein, the Colonel

wantedyoungpeople inKashmir topursueartisticdisciplinesononeof these Integration

Tours,claimingthatthiswouldbeapositiveway“tochannel”youngpeople’senergy.Inhis

beliefthatthatyoungKashmirisneededtohavemorecreativetoolswithwhichtoexpress

their views, the Colonel expressed his opinion that it was only by benefiting from the

economic/developmentopportunitiesofmainland Indiathatthehostility inKashmirmight

decline.Therefore,theColonelaskedmetodesignaprojectincollaborationwithaschoolin

western India --where IwasHeadofArtsat the time --whichwould functionasanarts-

based programme. In this programme, the Colonel requested that Integration Tour

participantsbeprovidedwithskill-buildingworkshopsinthearts;todevelopskillsthatthey

might then further develop upon their return to Kashmir. Aware of, and sensitive to, the

manyethicalimplicationsoftheColonel’srequest–ofmysubsequentpositioninginKashmir

asthehostofanIntegrationTour,thepossiblesurveillance/controltheArmedForcesmight

haveontheprogramme,thepossiblerepercussionsfortheKashmiriparticipantsupontheir

returntotheValley,amongothers–thesecondattemptwasdesignedwiththeknowledge

thattheethicsinvolvedmightnecessitatemywithdrawalfromtheprojectatalaterstage.

Whenthesecondattemptalsodidnotleadtoanytangibleoutcomes,anentirelydifferent

strategywasadoptedforthethirdattempt.ConsideringwhatdidnotworkwithAttempts1

and2,itemergedthatapossiblereasonforthefailureoftheseattemptsmighthavebeen

thetenuousnatureofthepoliticalclimateinKashmir.Sincetheintensityoftheconflictsis

unpredictable,perhaps itwas(andremains)untenablefortheArmedForcestocommitto

projectsthatrequireareal-timecommitmentoverdays/weeks.Therefore,athirdattempt

was designed to take logistical challenges into account and create a projectwithout the

requirement of real-time commitment. In this attempt, I planned to send a list of open-

endedquestionstoselectedsoldiers,whowouldthenwritetheirresponsestomevialetters

and/oremails.ThequestionsIhopedtoaskwereasfollows:

--WhatisyourmaingoalasasoldierpostedinKashmir?

133

-- If therewere a documentary film to bemade about your time in Kashmir,what is one

incident/experienceofyoursthatmustabsolutelybeincludedinthisdocumentary?

--Whatisthetoughestpartofwhatyoudo?

--Whatisthemostpositiveaspectofwhatyoudo?

--Howdoyouthinkyourfamilydealswithwhatyoudo?

--WhatisoneideathatyouhadaboutKashmirthathaschangedsinceyou'vebeenposted

there?

--WhatisonethingyoudonotunderstandaboutKashmir?

--Ifthereweresomethingyoucouldsaytoastone-pelter,whatwoulditbe?

--Ifthereweresomethingyoucouldsaytoamilitant,whatwoulditbe?

-- If therewas something that you could tell the government abouthow theyaredealing

withissuesinKashmir,whatwouldyoutellthem?

Uponreceivingsoldiers’responsestothesequestions,Iplannedtocollaborativelycreatea

playwith EKTA by using thematerial from the emails and letters as our sourcematerial.

Similarly to first two attempts however, this project proposal has still not been officially

approved/disapproved;thesilencecontinues.58

Giventhesilence thatshrouds theactivesoldierexperience inKashmir then,whatkindof

military space/context might be more accessible/less silent? As in the case of the Ex-

militants, there emerged in 2014 (duringMKMZ) the possibility of workingwith Kashmiri

Armed Forces Ex-servicemen. However, a new challenge emergedwith this population; a

problem that made this route onerous to follow. As Auto-ethnographic Excerpt 1 below

suggests,aparticularlyantagonisticinteractionbetweenmyselfandtheofficerinchargeof

ex-servicemen related activities in Kashmir kept this population out of bounds for the

doctoral project. While strategies are still being forged to work around this hurdle and

engageKashmiriArmedForcesEx-servicemenintheatrepractice,thispossibilitymightonly

58 One response from theColonel indicated that the floods inKashmir (in September2014andMarch/April 2015) and the subsequentrelief/rehabilitationeffortshadrestrictedtheapprovalprocess.

134

manifestoncesufficient timehaspassed for the tensesituation,describedbelow, tohave

dissipated.

“Youshouldtalktoex-servicemeninKashmir”,the(other)ColonelwhousedtoaccompanytheBrigadier’sdaughtertoMKMZ’srehearsalsandperformancessaid.“Theyarefacingsomanyproblems.Youshoulddooneofyourtheatreworkshopswiththem”.

Taking this asanopportunity to conductadevised theatreworkshopwithKashmiri Ex-servicemenwhosevoices might resonate/fracture interestingly with Ex-militant narratives, this (other) Colonel and I had ameetingoneevening.He,unlikethefirstwhocametoCages,didnotknowwhattheatrewas.Buthehadbeen part of a Bollywood crew that had recently been in Kashmir and used Armed Forces’ actors in themovie’scast.Soheknewallabout“thoseartisticpeople”,hesaid.Youknow,theones“wholiketoenjoy”.An understanding that I wish he had sharedwithme before I foundmyself alone in his company, in anisolated building (which had beenmade to sound,whileweweremaking plans for themeeting, to be ateemingworkplace),withaloadedguninhisdesk–agunthatthe(other)Colonelproudlyshowedtome.

MyattemptstotalkaboutworkingwithEx-servicemenintheValleywenttonaught.Because,yousee,thisColonelthoughtthatallartisticpeopleonly“liketoenjoy”themselves:thesub-textofthisstatementbeingthatthis(other)ColonelthoughtthatmyproposaltocreatetheatrewithEx-servicemenwasanopportunitytofoistunwantedattentiononafemaleartist(read:onewhodoesnothavea‘moral’code).

This meeting went to naught. When the coordinator of all Ex-servicemen related activities in Kashmirbehavesinappropriately,whatcanaresearcherdo?

This meeting went to naught in that I didn’t get to make theatre with Kashmiri Ex-servicemen. But itrevealedotherthings:whatdoesanon-soldierdowhenasoldierisaggressive?Whatdoesthatnon-soldierdointhepresenceofaloadedweaponthatthesoldiercoulduseagainstthem?Whatdoesthatnon-soldierdointhefaceofthatkindoffear,notonlyforthemselvesbutforthosewhoarenearanddeartothem–howcouldIcomplainaboutthisnon-gentleman-officer’sbehaviourtotheBrigadier,withoutputtingEKTAinhiscrosshairs?

ThismeetinginnowayaccomplishedwhatIhadhoped.

Auto-ethnographicExcerpt4:Onameetingthatoccurredin2014

In2013,IhadtheopportunitytoworkwithmilitarycadetsattheNationalDefenceAcademy

(NDA)inwesternIndia--thisexperiencewasseen,atthetime,asnotbeingintegraltothe

doctoral project but significant only to the researcher’s learning about the military

establishment.However,ontheheelsofthethreefailedattemptstoengagewiththeArmed

ForcesandtheimprobablenatureofworkingwithEx-servicemeninKashmir,thepracticeat

NDAemergedascentraltothisdissertation.

TheMakingoftheSoldier59

One of the primary relationships between civilians and military personnel arises in the

“civilian involvement in professionalmilitary education as putting non-military instructors

andstudentsinthesameclassroomwithofficers”(Bruneau&Tollefson,2006:255-256)and

59PartsofthissectiononWaiting…aretakenfromSolidarityandSoldier(ity):UsingTheatreinMilitaryContexts(Dinesh,2014c).However,extensivechangeshavebeenmadetothepublishedwriting.

135

itistothisideaofmilitaryeducationthatthisanalysisnowturns.Thissectionbeginswitha

considerationoftheworkshops/performanceIconductedwiththeArmedForcescadets in

theNDAoutside thecityofPune inWestern IndiabetweenAugustandOctober2013.By

describingthetwice-a-weektheatreworkshopsthatledtoaperformanceentitledWaiting…

the work that developed from this project might be used as a springboard to consider

intersectionsbetweenamilitaryeducationandthebroadrealmoftheatre/performance.

This endeavour was an attempt to explore what it might mean to use theatre as a

pedagogical and aesthetic tool with future government combatants.60 Returning to

Christopher Browning’s quote (in Foster, Haupt & De Beer, 2005:55) that highlights a

distinctionbetweenexcusing/explainingandunderstanding/forgiving,thisprojectwithNDA

cadets used Browning’s statement as a point of departure. However, while the intention

behind the work drew from Browning in its rejection of clichés around Armed Forces

narratives, the project did not seek to understand or explain the cadets either. Rather,

framedwithinwhatIhaddiscoveredaboutsoldier/non-soldierrelationshipsinKashmir,this

project at the NDA sought to function as a gesture toward those who fall outside

conventional boundaries of aesthetic events. Hans Ulrich Gumbrecht (in Thompson,

2009:132-133) describes this affective approach of making a gesture without specific

expectations,asapause;apausethatwetake“beforewebegintomakesense”.Thompson

(2009:133)furtherelaboratesonthispauseasbeingpartofan“ethicsofthepositionofthe

inquiry” and considers the potential that comes from “research that coexists alongside

experiences, processes or objects of interest”. By ensuring “that we are only ever

collaborators, co-inquirers, experiencing the work in an entirely valid but never superior

way”myapproachinthisprojectwithcadetswasaboutexploring–Thompson(2009:134)

nowquotesfromRancière(2010)--“anexaminationof‘systemsofpossibilities’ratherthan

assertionsofcertainties”.

The intentionalityofthisprojectwithNDAcadetswhowhenlaterpostedtoconflictzones

like Kashmir will most likely be considered ‘perpetrators’, was therefore not intended to

expressaunity/agreementwiththegovernment’sArmedForces.Rather,thisworksoughtto

examinethe‘theperformativityoftheseyoungcadets’militaryidentities–theirsoldier(ity),

60As inthepreviouschapter, Iusetheterm‘perpetrator’as littleaspossible.Whenused,thetermhasbeenutilised inmaterialthat isbeingreferenced.Whereusedbytheresearcher,‘perpetrator’ isputinquotationmarkssoastoindicatethatperpetrationisacomplexconceptandthatinitsusagethisresearcherisnotlookingtoassignblamebutrather,indicateauseofviolence.

136

ifImightcallitthat–regardlessofmyacceptanceof/agreementwithwhattheyexpressed.

Whatwasatstakeinthisworkwasnotanexplanationofwhyorhowthecadetsapproached

their roles as future ‘perpetrators’ of violence; instead, the project was designed as an

attempt to create a space inwhich theatrewould engage thosewho condone the use of

violenceandarethusseen(generally)asbeingoutsidethepurviewofaestheticendeavours.

I hoped, through this effort, to gain some insight into the grey zones of the soldiers’

experienceinKashmir.

Table12:WorkshopprocessatNDA

Waiting...:ThePedagogy

Step1:ThecadetswereaskedtocreateandperformshortplaysaboutanyfacetoftheirlivesatNDA,asawaytoeducatetheirnewDramaticsClubfacilitator(myself).

Step2:ThecadetswereaskedtowritedownwhytheyjoinedtheDramaticsClubandwhatskillstheywouldliketodevelop.

Step 3: The cadets were introduced to the idea of monologues and the theme of Waiting... i.e.something/someone that they were waiting for. They were then asked to draft individual monologuesaroundthistheme.

Step4:Thecadetswerepresentedwiththreeperformancestrategies:using linear/fragmentednarratives,playing with silences and pauses, and clarifying the target audience for their monologue. With theseelementsinmind,thecadetswereaskedtorefinethefirstdraftsoftheirmonologues.

Step 5: Themonologues were then grouped together according to the four main themes that emergedthroughthecadets’firstdrafts:NDARelatedWaiting;Friends&FamilyRelatedWaiting;IdealisticWaiting;MiscellaneousWaiting.

Step6:ThecadetswereshownavideooftheLonelySoldierMonologues (Benedict,2009),aperformancethatisbasedontestimoniesfromUSfemalesoldierswhoweredeployedinIraq.Thescreeningwasfollowedbyafacilitateddiscussionaboutstrategiesthatwereusedinthepiece.

Step7:Thecadetsweredividedintofourgroupsbasedontheirinterestinoneofthefourlargermonologuethemes, and were asked to combine the various monologues under that particular theme into onemonologue,takingsomecreativelicenseasinspiredbytheLonelySoldierMonologues.

Step8:Thecadetswere informedaboutvariousproductionrolesandwereaskedtochoose theonethatinterested them themost.Appropriate readingand facilitated tasksweregiven toeachgroup topreparethem for their particular role inWaiting.... The production roles included direction, stage management,design,acting,andplaywriting.

Step9:Takingintoaccounttheideasfromalltheproductionteams,adraftforthefinalscriptwascreated;adraftthatwaslateredited,rehearsed,andperformedbythecadets.

Step10:Waiting...wasperformedforanaudienceofthecadets’peersatan internationalschoolclosetotheNDA;thestudents intheaudience, inturn,performedapieceforthecadets.Theperformanceswerefollowed by a talkback between the two groups of young people, with them responding to each other’sperformances.

Pedagogy at the NDA follows hierarchies, discipline, and punishment. It was noteworthy

therefore,thateachoftheplayscreatedbythecadetsinStep1–wheretheywereaskedto

createandperformshortplaysaboutanyaspectoftheirlivesatNDA–invariablydescribed

137

a form of punishment that was part of the cadets’ training. I was later informed by

colleagues at NDA that these short plays might be seen as evidence of an unspoken

understanding at the institution, that being harshly punished by instructors and senior

students is integral toyoungercadets’becomingdisciplinedofficersandgentlemen.Given

this context,aprocess-basedapproachsuchas theone I implemented facedanumberof

roadblocks.Thecadetswereusedtodisciplinarianpedagogies,andtheideaofbeingasked

whattheywouldliketotalkabout,whattheywouldliketolearn,ledtoaninitialphaseof

chaos–forinstance,cadetsfellasleepwhenatthebeginningofeachsession,Iaskedthem

tojustclosetheireyesandlistentoapieceofmusic!61Inresponsestothesecircumstances

therefore, my pedagogy evolved from being one that aimed to work with the Dramatic

Club’sthirty-fivecadetscollectively,toonethatplacedanemphasisonchoice–cadetswere

givenfourorfivepossibleoptionsoftaskstheycouldundertakeduringeachofmysessions.

Thesetasks includedrelatively ‘easy’ones likereadingexcerpts fromplaysandproduction

role handbooks, to themore challenging tasks of being playwrights and creating original

texts.Cadetscouldengagehowevertheychosetoandforthosewhodidnotwanttoengage

atall,–inconsultationwiththecivilianofficerswhohadtomonitormysessions–Iputin

placeafive-minuterule.Ifanyonewasmorethanfiveminuteslate,hewouldnotbeallowed

tojointheclass;however,hewouldstillgethisattendancesheetsigned.So,thecadetwho

reallydidnotwanttomaketheatrehadtheoptionofshowingup lateandyet,not facing

any disciplinary consequences for that choice. This approach transformed the space from

beingchaotic,tobeingcreative.

Table13:ScriptofWaiting…

Waiting...:TheScript

EachofthesegmentsfromWaitingforGodotisthesameexcerpt,toestablishtherepetitivenatureofwaiting.Everytimethesegmentisrepeated,although,theprimaryemotionwithwhichthesceneisplayedisdifferent.Theprimaryemotionisindicatedatthebeginningofeverysceneandmaybeadaptedasthedirectorseesfit.Willthisemotionbeshowninthestaging?Thebodylanguage?Thevoice?Thelighting?Thesametwoactorsalwaysperformthesesegments.

Eachscenehastwoparts:Part1(whichistheexcerptfromWaitingforGodot)andPart2(whichincludesthecadets’ monologues). At aminimum, the piece requires 6 actors. However, this is subject to the director’sconcept.

Scene1:Part1PrimaryEmotion:Sorrow

61 This ideawas inspiredbyMarilynNelson’s (2001)meditation timeat thebeginningofherpoetry sessionsat theWestPointMilitaryAcademyintheUnitedStates.

138

Estragon:Let'sgo.Vladimir:Wecan't.Estragon:Whynot?Vladimir:We'rewaitingforGodot.Estragon:(despairingly).Ah!(Pause.)You'resureitwashere?Vladimir:What?Estragon:Thatweweretowait.Vladimir:Hesaidbythetree.(Theylookatthetree.)Doyouseeanyothers?Estragon:Whatisit?Vladimir:Idon'tknow.Awillow.Estragon:Wherearetheleaves?Vladimir:Itmustbedead.Estragon:Nomoreweeping.Vladimir:Orperhapsit'snottheseason.Estragon:Lookstomemorelikeabush.Vladimir:Ashrub.Estragon:Abush.Vladimir:A—.Whatareyouinsinuating?Thatwe'vecometothewrongplaceEstragon:Heshouldbehere.Vladimir:Hedidn'tsayforsurehe'dcome.Estragon:Andifhedoesn'tcome?Vladimir:We'llcomebacktomorrow.Estragon:Andthenthedayaftertomorrow.Vladimir:Possibly.Estragon:Andsoon.Vladimir:Thepointis—Estragon:Untilhecomes.Scene1:Part2WhatamIwaitingfor?Hmm...youknow,twoyearsagoIwaslivinginJammu.ItwasrainingheavilyandIwasthinkingoftheassignmentIhadtocompleteandsubmitthenextday.Amidstallthis, Iheardthemelodioussoundofaflutecomingfromsomewhere.Iturnedmyheadaroundtofindanoldmansittingonthedoorstepofanoldagehome,playingthefluteinthemostincrediblewayIhadeverheard.Tearswererollingdownhischeeks....Thismansatonthedoorstepeveryday,playinghisflute,waiting,hopingthathisson–hissonwhohadjustlefthimthere–wouldrealisehismistakeandcomebackforhim.It’sjust...fathersandsonsjusthavethisbond,youknow?...MyfatherwasanarmymanandwhenIgotintotheAcademy,hewashappierthanIwas!Seeinghisjoy,hispride,seeingthatImightbeabletodoforhimwhattheflute-playingman’ssondoesnot....Iamwaitingforthedaymyfatherwillseemeinthisuniform,withstarsshininginhiseyes,flaggingofftheaircraftwhichisbeingflownbyhisson.

Scene2:Part1PrimaryEmotion:Happiness.RepeatsamesceneasScene1:Part1.

Scene2:Part2

WhatamIwaitingfor?WhenIwasakid,IwastoldIwasworthless,thatsinceIwasnotgoodinacademics,Iwasgoodfornothing.NooneeveraskedmewhatIwantedtodoorwhereIwantedtogo...Andthen,intheeighthgradeIwatchedtheBollywoodmovieBorder.Forthefirsttimeinmylife,IwasfascinatedbythearmedforcesandthatnightwhenIwenttobed,Ihadadream.Anincredibledream.

An army of 300 brave Spartans charging over the enemy territory. The anger and blood in their eyes, thefeelingofpatriotismfortheirland.Oneamongthem–ayoungsoldier—charging;makinghiswayouttoshedthebloodofhisenemy.Trrr...trrr....trr...trrrrrrrrrrr..Tofly,toweartheuniform,todosomethingformyland...

So,whenyouaskmewhatI’mwaitingfor,well,IwaitforthedayawarbreaksoutandIgetcalledtomarchahead...IwaitforthedayIcanshedeverydropofmybloodinservingmymotherlandandherboundaries,and

139

whenIcomebackfromwar,tocontinuemyworktomakethiscountryabetterplace.It’sthiswaitthatkeepsmealive.

AndallthosepeoplewhotoldmeI’mworthless,I’mwaitingforthechancetoprovethemwrong.

Scene3:Part1PrimaryEmotion:Anger.RepeatsamesceneasScenes1,2:Part1.

Scene3:Part2

WhatamIwaitingfor?I’mwaitingforher.Forhertocomebacktomeandsaytomethatyes,shewaswronginherchoice. Iwanther to feel that Iwas thebestguyshecouldhaveevermet,andshemadethebiggestmistakeofher lifeby choosinghim. I am justwaiting for theday that Iwill finish theAcademy,becomeanofficer,andgotoherwearingthatshiningolivegreenuniform...Isthatwhysheleftme?BecauseIamanarmymanandshewouldhavetobeboththefatherandmothertoourchildren?...Idon’tknow.AllIknowisthatIwanther to regret choosinghim.Andhe,hewill realise thathe toomade thebiggestmistakeofhis lifebybetrayingsuchagoodfriendlikeme...

WhatamIwaitingfor?I’mwaitingforatruefriend,truelove.Butwhatdoesthis‘truth’looklike?Howdoesitbehave? Do I ask for too much from the people in my life? I don’t know... Maybe I’m asking for toomuch...(Pause)

Anarmymangettingdesperateaboutagirl...Youknow,Ithinkit’sbecauseIhavetoomuchtimeonmyhandsnow. These peace postings, they give you toomuch time to think.Nextweek though, nextweek I’m beingpostedtoKashmirandthen,I’msureI’llforgetallaboutthepast.

AndIwillfindsomeonenew.Someonebetter.Iguessthat’ssomethingworthwaitingfor!

Scene4:Part1

PrimaryEmotion:Desperation.RepeatsamesceneasScenes1,2,3:Part1.

Scene4:Part2

WhatamIwaitingfor?Youknow,Iwantedtobecomeadoctor...orto justfocusonbuyinganewcar...ortostartachainofrestaurants...butthen,IgotselectedintotheNationalDefenceAcademy...Andnow,nowmylife is so...screwed up. Running ...7 km, 10 km, 12 km, 20 km, punishments for minor mistakes, physicalstrength but intellectual degradation....I am eagerly waiting for the daywhen I’ll finish the Academy. I feelsuffocated;likeI’mcagedinsomekindofprison.

Butuntilthathappens,Iwaitforthetermbreak,counttheDaysLefttoGoHome,clearmyPhysicalTrainingtests,finishcrosscountryruns,trytoclearmyexams.Mostofall,Iwaittogohome.ForthatdaywhenIcanwake up, pack my bags, check my tickets, get ready in jeans and a t-shirt, board the train, and leave theAcademy. I closemyeyeson the train and seepeople all aroundme, cheering, clapping. I’mplayingonmyguitar,performingtothewordsofmyownlife.Or,or,I’msittingonaverandawithagoodbook,ahotcupofchai...(Longpause)

YouknowwhatI’mwaitingfor?I’mwaitingforthedaythatIhaveachildandthenheorshegetstoliveherlifeherway.I’mwaitingforhertohavethefreedomandtheindependencethatI...(Pause)

Everydaythatpassesbymakesmethinkthat Iamadayclosertowhat Iamwaitingfor.Forthewait tobeover.

Scene5:Part1

PrimaryEmotion:Hope.RepeatsamesceneasScenes1,2,3,4:Part1.

The civilian officers who were my liaisons with the cadets, and whose presence was

mandatorywhenan‘outsider’likemyselfwasworkingonNDA’spremises,mentionedtome

atourfirstmeetingthattheatre–tothecadetsandtoNDAingeneral–impliedaformof

entertainmentthatwasinfluencedbythegenreofBollywood.Accordingtothislogic,Iwas

140

told,playsatNDAmustnotmakeaudiencesthink–sincethecadetshadrigoroustraining

schedulesthatwerephysicallyandmentallydemanding–butmustonlybeanentertaining

breakfromtherequireddisciplineoftheireverydayschedules.Whilethecivilianinstructors’

view of Bollywood being entirely devoid of commentary and critique is itself debatable,

givenmyownpreferencesforanaestheticsofuncertaintyanddiscomfort,Idecidedtouse

SamuelBeckett’s (2011)WaitingforGodotasmyprimarilystimulus inthisproject. Imade

this choice because of the affect that Beckett accomplishes through the characters of

Estragon and Vladimir; asking his audiences, by extension, to consider the existential

questionofwhateachofusmightbewaitingforinourlives.Usingthenotionof‘waiting’as

mypointofdeparturethen,wasachoiceImadesoastogettoknowthecadetsbetter;to

understandwhattheywerewaitingforintheirlives,andinsodoing,togetaglimpseinto

whytheseyoungmenmighthavedecidedtojointheArmedForcesestablishment.

DecidingtoframethescriptaroundWaitingforGodot,usingthecadet’sownmonologues,

and staging the performance in the round then, were conscious choices on my part –

aesthetically,ethically,andpedagogically–choicesthatIhadtoconsistentlydefendforthe

cadetsIwasworkingwith.TalkingabouttheTheatreoftheAbsurdasamovementsparked

manyvibrantdiscussionswiththecadetsaroundwhatmakesaperformance‘successful’and

whatitmeanstocreateworkthataudiences‘like’.Similarly,discussingstagingapieceinthe

roundinsteadoftheprosceniumwhichwasacceptedamongthecadetsastheonlywayto

stageaperformance,sparkeddiscussionsthatkeptgoingbacktoonequestionforthem:if

audiences did not ‘like’ a performance, could that theatrical production be considered

successful?As for themonologues, theyaskedme:“Butwhywillpeoplewant to listen to

whatwehave to say?”Nevertheless,whileWaiting…mightnothavemanaged toget the

cadetstochangetheirmindsentirelyaboutothervaluesoftheatreapartfromitspotential

to entertain, there was some critical questioning that was generated. Ultimately though,

theyonlyacceptedmyaestheticchoicesbecausetheir finalperformancewasnot tobeat

NDAfortheirpeers/commandingofficers,butwas insteadtobeperformedforagroupof

internationalstudentsatanearbyCollegewhereIworkedatthetime.Assuagedbythefact

thattheywouldbeperformingforanaudiencethattheybelievedwould‘get’thepieceina

way that their peers/commanding officers would not, this choice of our target audience

becametheonlywayinwhichthecadetswerewillingtoexperimentwithformandcontent.

141

Themonologues,asmentionedinthepedagogicaloverviewabove,werefourtheme-based

collations of the thirty-five initial monologues that were written by the cadets. The

monologues were as stimulating as they were banal; as clear as they were obscure; as

honest as theywere not. Thereweremany noteworthy insights that emerged during the

processof creating themonologues. For instance,manyof themonologuesdescribed the

cadets’waiting to graduate from theNDA. Talkingabout the intellectual degradation that

came fromtheAcademy’sprimary focusonphysical training,cadetsmentioned thestress

andfatigueofdisciplinarymechanisms,andtheacutehomesicknessthatledtoacountdown

of DLTGH (Days Left ToGoHome). There seemed to be an acute dissatisfactionwith the

currentphaseoftheireducationallives,andmostofthosewhodiscussedtheirfrustrations

withtheAcademyexpressedtheirconfusionatthekindofeducationtheywerereceiving–

waitingforthedaythattheycouldleavetheplace.Whilemanywhoexpressedthisangstdid

not articulate why then they continued to stay at NDA and seek this military education,

some mentioned reasons that ranged from fulfilling parents’ dreams, to getting a free

education,toembodyingtheromanticimageofamilitaryheroasperformedinBollywood

films. Therewere the few of course, who spoke of their nationalistic/patriotic fervour to

fight for their nation. My “congenital pacifism”, to borrow again from Marilyn Nelson

(2001:553),was constantly challengedby theseparticular instances.Given thatpatriotism

and nationalism are ideals that are highly critiqued, questioned – and evenmocked – in

othercontextsinwhichIwork,thesinceritywithwhichthecadetsspokeof“spillingblood”

and “conquering enemies”was a quality thatwasprovocative and stimulating; a sincerity

that has layered my thinking about these young men whose participation as soldiers in

India’sconflictzoneswill,inthefuture,becomeactionswithwhichIwillstruggle.

ThedubiouspositionthattheartsoccupyattheNDAwasrevealedatmanyinstancesduring

theprocess. Theatre sessionswere cancelledanumberof times for reasons ranging from

footballmatchestoexaminationsordinners,andrequestsfortheDramaticsClubtothrow

togetherperformancesataweek’snotice–“It’sonlyaplayafterall,howlongcanittaketo

putonetogether?”Apartfromdealingwiththepedagogicalchallengesofworkingwithina

military context then, the complexities of my work were augmented by the very ‘low’

positionthattheartsseemedtooccupythere.WhiletheCommandantoftheAcademytold

meinameetingthathealwayswantedtobeaperformerandthathethoughtthecadets

142

wouldhavea lot to learnfromtheatricalprocesses,hisbeliefcertainlydidnot filterdown

into lower ranksat theAcademy.My focusonaffect,onemphasizing thepotentialof the

“nopoint”orthe“bewilderment”thatJamesThompson(2003;2009)describes,seemedto

beatoddswithaneducation thatwasgrounded firmly inanevaluationofeffect.Howto

workwithineffect-basedsystemswhilenotlosingsightoftherichpossibilityofaffectthen,

wasaconstantrenegotiationbetweenmycivilianofficermonitors,thecadets,theNDA,and

myself.

Aperformativityofidentitieshadtobejuggledinthisrenegotiation–thatofbeingatheatre

makerinacontextthatdoesnotseemtovalueart;thatofbeingawomaninaninstitution

that does not allow female students; that of being a civilian in a civil-military binary that

remains an unaddressed area of study and reflection in India. These negotiations and

renegotiations continued throughout the process and found their way into the final

performanceofWaiting...foranaudienceofyoungpeoplefromdifferentpartsoftheworld.

Theperformancewasmiredincomplexities:battlingNDA’srulesthatcadetsmustnotcome

intocontactwithforeignnationals;negotiatingwithofficersincommand,onthedayofthe

show,whowanted to cancel the performance for a football game; facilitating discussions

betweenyoungpeople:onegroupfromaneducationalinstitutionthatespousesnon-violent

ideologies and the other group from an institution that trains ‘warriors’. In the talk back

after the performances, the two groups of young people reflected on each other’swork,

resulting in the cadets making one particularly poignant statement: “We never thought

someonewouldfindourwordsinteresting”.

Ultimately, many of the revelations that arose from the process and performance of

Waiting…beganto linkbackto larger ideassurroundingmilitaristiceducationandtraining

that craft theperformancesof a soldier in a context likeKashmir. In theseperformances,

conventionalsoldierlyactssuchas“weaponhandling,fieldcraft,andthedrivingofmilitary

vehiclesbothonandoff roads”becomes relevantalongside lessobviousperformancesof

soldier(ity) -- “lighting a cigarette or a cooking fire in highwinds and heavy rain, keeping

one’skitdryinthefield,cookingmilitaryrationswithapalatableresult,andholdingone’s

liquor on a night out” (Kummel, Caforio & Dandekar, 2009: 22). Through these many

performances, soldiers are implicitly and explicitly trained for periods of isolation and

loneliness under hard physical duress since “it is possible that a soldier could be on a

143

mission”forextendedphases“withoutleavingthecampatall,withouthavingtastedmeals

typical for the country, without having seen the local currency or having listened to the

languageofthehostcountry”(Kummel,Caforio&Dandekar,2009:43).Ultimatelytherefore,

whilepartsofthesoldierexperiencearegovernedby“potentiallyexistingdangers”,thelife

ofthesoldierisalsoframed“byroutine,boredom,sometimesatoosmallworkloadandthe

feeling of ‘being locked up’ inside the camp” (Kummel, Caforio & Dandekar, 2009:43). In

additiontotheidentitycrisesthatthesetimesofisolationandclaustrophobiacouldleadto

–resultingmanytimes insuicidesandfratricides--militaryanthropologistDonnaWinslow

(1997:55–56) has also highlighted the particular role that uniforms and badges play for

troopsfindingtheiridentity.Whileitispossible“totakeofftheuniformandtobaskinthe

sun” in the less visible “relaxation zones”, these informal spaces are also ones in which

soldiers’ behaviour ismonitored by superiors [referring back to the relationship between

jawansandofficers intheIndianArmedForces](Winslow,1997:55–56).Thesehierarchical

relationships also problematicallymanifest in “jokes and pranks [that] form an important

factor in creating camaraderie, motivation and identity” (Kummel, Caforio & Dandekar,

2009:52); a culture of joking andpranking that contributes to acts of hazing/bullying that

was alluded to by some of the NDA cadets. Given this larger framework of military

education/training insculptingasoldier’sperformancesofsoldiering,what is theplacefor

theatreandtheartsintherepertoireofgovernmenttroops?

Inattemptingtosituatetheplacefortheartsinthislargercontextofeducatingandtraining

soldiers,itisrelevanttolookattheaccountsofcivilianteacherswhooffercoursesonpoetry

andliteratureattheWestPointAcademyintheUS.ElizabethSamet(2002:112)forexample,

saysthathercourseonpoetry“surprisesmanycadets”amdspeakstothehighnumberof

soldierswhobegintheclass“withaconvictionthatpoetrycanhavenothingwhatevertodo

with soldiering” but “come away with a recognition of the long-standing connections

betweenliteratureandwar;ofthehistoricalroleofpoetryinshapingculture,attitudes,and

values;andof theongoing imperative formilitaryofficers tobeable touse languagewith

precision”. The place of poetry/literature/theatre in the education of military cadets is

thereforepartofabroaderdebate;“adebateasoldastheinstitutionitself–aboutwhether

the Military Academy’s primary mission is to train or to educate Army officers” (Samet,

2002:117).MarilynNelson(2001:553)addstoSamet’saccountsbysuggestingthattheplace

144

oftheartsinamilitaryeducationmightliein“help[ing]mycadetsrecognize,evendisobey,

stupidandunjustorders,andtogivewiseandwell-consideredones”.

The links between artistic efforts and themilitary are not as sparse as onemight initially

believe.MichaelBalfour(2007:3)drawsfrom“Celtic (andNorse)history[where]thereare

storiesabouthowwarrior armies celebrated their victoriesbackat camp.Oftenbasedon

hillsideencampmentsthesoldiersandfighterswouldgravitatetooneorothersideof the

hilltocelebrateandrest”;creatingsatiresofopposingforces,celebratoryeventsofvictories,

and morale-boosters before battles. However, Balfour (2007:5) then draws from George

Brandt’s (2001:123) experiencesduring the SecondWorldWar, that “there is no cause to

praisethesetheatricalactivitiesbeyondtheirmerits.Theyservedtheneedsofthemoment

andthatwasenough.Theywereeffectivemoraleboosters forparticipantsandspectators

alike– foras longas theeffects lasted”.Balfour (2007:5) thenmovesontocontemporary

wars saying that they “are no different in exploiting theatrical techniques to motivate

troops, recruit new soldiers, or to bolster support among the local population”. In

Afghanistan, the “visit of popular English entertainers” to perform for their government’s

troops “is just a recent manifestation of a long tradition; all modern armies send

entertainerstothefrontlinetobringcomedyandsongtotheirtroops”(Dixon,2010:270).

Zhriki,asoldier inKosovo, isBalfour’s(2007:4)primarysourceanddefineshispractice“as

‘military theatre’, because the showwas about raisingmorale for the soldiers, reminding

themofthecauseand‘givingthemsomethingtofightfor’(Zhriki,2006)”.WhileZhriki’sfirst

audienceisthesoldiers,hissecondaudienceiscomprisedoflocalsinvillagesforwhomthe

performance’s objective “was ‘to help them forget and to say we are protecting you’”

(Balfour,2007:4).ThethirdaudienceZhrikispeakstoaretheoutsidersthattheywantedto

perform for; showing “that the army were not terrorists” and “that we had art (Zhriki,

2006)’.IthelpedtodocumentthattheKLA62werenotarabble,butanorganisedforcewith

intellectualswhohadtheirowntheatre”(Balfour,2007:4).

In addition to such direct manifestations of theatre in the context of military activities,

Balfour,Hughes and Thompson (2009:229) talk about the performance-like nature ofwar

andemphasise theadopted tacticsofperformance thatArmedForcesuse towardvarious

affects/effects.Forexample,JishaMenon(inBalfour,Hughes&Thompson,2009:1-2)speaks

62 KLAisanacronymfortheKosovoLiberationArmy.

145

about theWagahborder ceremony (performance)between India andPakistan thatworks

“asa reminder thatperformance's claim tobe insteadofwar isoftenhard todisentangle

fromregimesofpower”, suggesting that“performancemaywellbeacontinuationofwar

andpoliticsbyothermeans”.Hughes (2011:2) furthers the linkbetweenperformanceand

military efforts by citing examples of Hollywood catastrophe movie specialists who are

recruitedbytheUSgovernment,followingtheeventsofSeptember11th2001,“withtheaim

of imaginingpossiblescenarios for futureattacksandhowto fight them'” (Zizek2002:16).

Furthermore,aspartofthislargermachinerythathasbeeninstitutedbytheUSinitswaron

terror,“theofficial9/11Commissionreportcalledfor 'institutionalising imagination'atthe

highest levels of military and administrative bodies responsible for the security of the

nation” (Hughes, 2011:2). It is to this aspect of institutionalizing imagination in military

trainingthatthisanalysiswillnowturn.

SpeakingabouttheUSArmy,ZackWhitmanGill(2009:141)describes“‘theatreimmersion’:

asystemoftrainingthatutilizesprofessionalactors,scripts,sets,props,andanaudienceina

pain-stakingefforttomimeticallysimulatewar”. Intheseexercisessoldiersarerequiredto

participatein“scenariosthatsimulatedreal-lifemilitaryoperations”(Hughes,2011:67)and

it is these scenarios that Diana Taylor (2009:1888) has called “frameworks for thinking”,

where instructors “stage fake shootings, using sheep's blood and guts to create the

appearanceofarealaccidentthathadoccurredduringasimulatedtrainingscenario,testing

asoldier'sabilitytorespondtoemergency”(Hughes,2011:67).Inatleastonecase,insuch

immersiveenvironments, a soldier’s careerwasended forunnecessarily “‘killing’ civilians”

(Filkins&Burns,2006).Inthisprocessoftheatricalimmersionasmilitarytraining,“theArmy

now produces subjects—soldiers—through performance, who are uniquely equipped to

confrontthede-centred, fragmented,anddestabilizingnatureofwar” (Gill,2009:143).Gill

(2009:148)furthersuggeststhatinthisimmersion,akintothegoalsofCages,“theboundary

between rehearsal and performance is seamless” and in these theatre immersions

therefore,“troopsmust“feeltheyhavearrivedinIraqorAfghanistan”.Eventuallytherefore,

inthese immersiveenvironments,“soldierswill findtheenvironmentsorealthattheywill

maketheirmistakesherefirst,sotheydonotmaketheminIraq’”(Filkins&Burns,2006in

Gill, 2009:148). These immersive learning environments, like those we saw in Cages, are

extremely fraught with complexities. For example, speaking about the character of “Mr.

146

Hakim”,ahotdogsalesmanwhogoesfromcharmingtokillingUSsoldiersinanimmersive

trainingexercise,“themostobvious lesson […] is tonever trustany Iraqis,nomatterhow

friendly they seem. It is a lesson that, unlearned, has killed many American soldiers on

combatdutyinIraq”(Gill,2009:150).

ScottMagelssen(2009:67-68)saysthatsoldiersinimmersivetrainingenvironmentsbecome

actorswho “perform roles in an unfolding and coproduced narrative” and that they “can

controlthenarrativetoacertaindegree:bystoppingaparticularinject,bybehavingoutside

expectations, by altering the trajectory of the thread through really good or really bad

behaviour.” However, and here is where the complexities emerge, soldier-actors in such

immersivescenariosare“alwaysreined inwithinthetightlycontrolledworld” (Magelssen,

2009:67-68). Inthecontextofmilitarytrainingthen,“theatreimmersionworkstoinstitute

combat-as-rehearsal,inwhichsoldiershavealreadybeenexposedtothehorrorsofwarand

are trained to remain so collected in their decisionmaking that combat becomes simply

anotherrehearsal”;arehearsalthatis“alwaysdownplayedasmerelyanothersteptowards

aperpetuallydeferredperformance” (Gill,2009:154).Similar toCagesandMKMZthen, in

this immersive combat-as-rehearsal, failure of representation is as important as the

representations themselves. In immersive training environments that are created for

soldiers,“it isthereforeoftheutmostimportancethatthemimesiscontinuouslyfails,that

soldiers never fully suspend their disbelief in training and remain capable of reflecting on

their actions” (Gill, 2009:154). It is important to mention here that the abovementioned

analysesandscholarlyaccountsofimmersivetrainingenvironmentsprimarilydrawfromthe

US context and information about these techniques in the Indian Armed Forces is not

publiclyavailable.63

The use of Immersive Theatre techniques in military training provokes three important

pointsof consideration. First,what kindsof learningdo immersiveenvironments facilitate

that non-immersive environments do not? Jeanne Meister (Testa in Taylor, 2009:1890)

arguesthat“the‘seriousgames’thattrainthemilitary”leadtoa75percentretentionrate’

asopposedtofivepercentforlectureswithPowerPointandtenpercentforreading”.While

this idea is furtherexplored in theconcludingchapter,Meister’s conclusionpoints toward

the pedagogical potential of Immersive Theatre and suggests the need formore rigorous

63Myquestionsregardingthesame,totheColonel,wentunanswered.

147

inquiry into the form’s impact on its spectator-participants from a cognitive standpoint.

Second,ifsoldiersinimmersiveenvironmentsareconstantlyexposedtoviolencesuchthat

thedeathstheycausearenotreallydeaths,whatisthelikelihoodthatthesoldierbecomes

moredesensitisedtotheactofkilling?Consequently,isarehearsalofanykindofoppression

likelytodesensitiseparticipantstoactsthatdonotcontainthesamegravityinrehearsalas

theydooutsidethatspace?Forinstance,inwhatcircumstanceswouldembodyingawoman

inCagespotentially desensitise amale spectator-participant from the relative subjugation

experienced by some Kashmiri women? In addition to these considerations around

desensitization, the use of Immersive Theatre scenarios in themilitary establishment also

forcesme tocontemplatemyownartistic leanings toward this form:whatare theethical

implications of using Immersive Theatre in an active conflict zone like Kashmir,when the

formitselfmightbeimplicatedwithinthemilitaryestablishment?

Outcomes

The bricolaged methodology in this phase of the project led to outcomes that intersect

interestinglywith those that emerged throughCagesandMKMZ.WhileCages revealed a

possibleapproachtogreyzonesthatisrootedinthenotionofrelationalviolencebetween

differentlyprivilegedciviliansandMKMZpointedtowardtheshadowy/liminalplaceswithin

thecategoryofthemilitancy inKashmirratherthanbetweenCivilSocietyandMilitant/Ex-

militants as initially anticipated, this phase points toward a third type of grey zone. The

identification of military educational environments as a space for theatre practice was

initially a logistical choice in response to my failed attempts to reach out to the Armed

Forces inKashmir.What thepractice revealedhowever,was thatmilitarycadetsoccupya

grey zone in their embodiments of soldiering; embodiments that are nebulous precisely

because these individuals are not yet what theymight become. Therefore, working with

cadetswhomightonedaybepostedtoKashmir,seemstopointtowardonelinkinthechain

between‘victim’and‘perpetrator,whichmightberemouldedbythepracticeofmakingand

performingtheatre.

This target group identification also has interesting repercussions on considerations of

affect.While intangiblepost-performanceoutcomesweresufficientforKashmiriaudiences

forCagesand insufficient fornon-ex-militantKashmiri audiences forMKMZ,Waiting… led

148

me to more carefully consider the difference between affect and effect. Although affect

might have no desired/articulated objective and be strengthened by unpredictable short-

termand long-term traces inperformerand spectators, isnotaffect still aneffect?When

thisprojectwasinitiallyconceptualised,Iperceivedthetwoconceptsofaffectandeffectas

beingdistinguishedbythesimplisticunderstandingthateffectissomehow inoppositionto

affect; effect is a tangible outcome, while affect is not. Effect then, in this more naïve

understanding,wasseenas linkingwith instrumentalismandutilitarianism;whereasaffect

was prised – by me -- as not being focussed on a specific result/outcome.WhileMKMZ

pointedmetowardthelimitationsofaffectasanarticulationof intention,especiallywhen

making theatre in a time/place of war, working with/around Armed Forces narratives in

Kashmirhasledtothedesiretonuancetheconversationbetweentheaffectandeffecti.e.,

looking for the grey zones between the two, rather than seeing them as categories in a

mutuallyexclusiverelationship.

The need for thismore careful delineation between affect and effect also presents itself

when we look at how process-based spectatorship manifested in Waiting…, albeit

unintentionally.Asmentionedearlier,NDAcadetsperformedforstudentsataneighbouring

institution; the students at the College were specifically the theatre students that I was

teachingatthetime.TheCollege,initspursuitofidealsforpeaceandsustainability,hada

large student population that was anti-military interventions (generally speaking) and

therefore, the cross-community performance ofWaiting… stood the risk of both groups

beingantagonisedbytheOther’sopinionsaroundtheuseofviolence.However,therewere

twofactorsthatmitigatedtheemergenceofanyantagonism:1)thatbothgroupshadbeen

prepared for this eventwith an explanationof their respective institutional affiliations; 2)

that the framing of the performances within an educational environmentmeant that, by

default,wehadaudienceswhowantedtolearnabouttheOther. It is interestingtoreturn

here toAllen Tough’s (1971:65) statementson adult learning thatwerementioned in the

concluding section ofMKMZ,where therewas a reflection on individuals beingwilling to

change theirmindsonly if therewasamotivation to “initiateefforts to change theirown

beliefs and attitudes”. Although I did not quite understand how to place thatmotivation

withinthecontextofMKMZ,theperformanceofWaiting…,byvirtueofbeingplacedinan

educational environment, seemed to naturally inculcate a willingness to “see reality as it

149

actually is, even if it hurts” (Tough, 1971:65). What this resulted in then, was a critical

reflectionofthespacesinwhich,andthespectatorsforwhom,CagesandMKMZhadbeen

performed in Kashmir.Would the contentious outcomeshavebeendifferent if the target

audience forMKMZhad been the College students in Anantnag?Would there have been

moreofamotivation tosee theOther if theperformanceshad takenplacenotatEKTA–

which as an artistic, public space is seen as one where political positionsmust be taken

ratherthanquestionedorexplored?

Additionally,asaresultofbeingplacedinaneducationalenvironment,thenotionofnovelty

in this phase of the project was linked more closely to pedagogy than aesthetics. While

CagesandMKMZconsiderednoveltyvis-à-visImmersiveandDocumentaryTheatre,novelty

in thisphasewasmore importantpedagogically. Inadditiontotheways inwhichmyown

pedagogical performanceswere extremely novel in the context of amilitary environment

like NDA, novel approaches to pedagogy had to develop due to constantly having to re-

design attempts to work with the Armed Forces -- from a first attempt that was based

around a formal pedagogical approach of organising artist in residency programme; to a

more involved, non-hierarchical pedagogy of created arts-based Integration Tours; to a

blended learningpedagogy thatwouldmix real and virtualword interactions in theemail

writing project. Novelty in pedagogy in these instances then, became simultaneously

aesthetic and ethical strategies: aesthetic in how these strategies had to be crafted and

designed; ethical in their needing to be constantly responsive to what emerged through

practice.Therefore,whilenoveltyintheuseofaesthetics(likeImmersiveandDocumentary

Theatre)consideredhowintermediate/extremenoveltywouldprimarilyaffectspectatorsin

Cages andMKMZ, novelty in terms of pedagogy puts forward the possibility of exploring

howintermediate/extremelevelsofnoveltymightfosterdiversepedagogicaloutcomesfor

co-creators.

In addition to these pedagogical considerations, the archival research around military

narrativesalongsidethe‘failed’attempts,putforwardtwoideasthatmightshapethefinal

aesthetic of a theatrical performance about Armed Forces narratives in Kashmir: the

importanceofsilenceandtheneedforaperformancestructurethatallowsforpoly-vocality.

Apart from direct instances of human rights violations where the soldier might less

contentiouslybetermed‘perpetrator’,discussionsaroundwinningheartsandminds--not

150

tomention instances of fratricide and suicide -- present themurkier sides of the soldier

experience. The aesthetic of any theatrical performance that takes on the challenge of

representingthegreyzonesofthesoldierexperienceinKashmirtherefore,willhavetofind

dramatic strategies that while showcasing the problematic silence in which the military

establishment is shrouded/shrouds itself, also puts forward the multiple dimensions to

victimhoodandperpetrationamongstthesoldierpopulation.Thatsaid,whatdoesitmean

practically, to aestheticise the silence of the Armed Forces? What does it mean to

aesthetically represent grey zones innarratives that areas fraughtas thoseof theArmed

ForcesinKashmir?GivenhowMKMZrevealedthathumanising/victimisingpersonaslikeEx-

militants is extremely contentious, and possibly dangerous, is there even a space to

showcase non-perpetrator dimensions to the character of the soldier in the context of

Kashmir?ThesearequestionsthatIcontinuetograpplewithasEKTAandIworkoncrafting

aperformancethatincludessoldiervoices–aprojectthatistofollowthecompletionofthis

thesis.Despitethesequestionsthatremainhowever,therearesomeconsiderationsthatwill

shape any future performance that includes non-mainstream narratives of soldier as

perpetrator,foraKashmiriaudience.First,performancesthataddressthesoldierexperience

inKashmirwillneedtobesupportedbyaprocess-basedapproachtospectatorshipthatwill

frame the creators’ intention and give the spectators the tools to decipher particular

aesthetic choices/codes. Second, there is a need in such performances for a

narrative/dramaticstructurethatbalancessoldiers’voiceswiththeperspectives/narratives

of those non-soldierswho are (indisputable) victims to the soldiers’ acts of violence. And

finally,itisimportanttoconsiderthepoliticsoflocationandtoidentifyaperformancespace

thatislinkedwithlearningandexploration,ratherthanwithpoliticalpositioning.

Whiletheoutcomesabovelinkcloselywiththeaesthetic,pedagogical,andethicalconcepts

that this doctoral project was framed around, a more wide-ranging outcome from this

bricolageemergesintheunanticipatedimplicationofImmersiveTheatrewithinthemilitary

context.ApartfromtheethicalconsiderationsthatarisewhenImmersiveTheatreisputto

useoutsidethemilitarycontext inanactiveconflictzone,a largerquestionemergeshere:

why,andhow,doimmersiveenvironmentsstaywithparticipantsdifferentlyincomparison

withnon-immersiveandmore‘conventional’spectatorexperiences?Whileitisinstinctively

apparent to me that multi-sensory environments will heighten the possibility of leaving

151

tracesofthetheatricalexperienceinthespectator’srepertoire,whydoesthisaffectoccur?

Dotheprocessesofcognitionoperatedifferentlywhenanactionisembodiedwithmultiple

sensorystimuliratherthanwiththetwoexpectedsensesofseeingandhearingthatarethe

more widely used modes of spectatorship in the theatre? Do multi-sensory, immersive

environments create more nuanced ‘grey zones’ of theatrical experience where Self and

Other more obviously collide and fracture, or do they more powerfully desensitise its

spectator-participantsfromactsofoppressionandthus,strengthenexistingpolarities?Itis

withthesequestionsinmindthatthisthesiswillnowmovetoitsconcludingchapter.

152

CONCLUSIONS

As mentioned in the introduction, this doctoral project did not begin with one concrete

researchquestion.Instead,inthespiritofpractice-basedresearch,therewerethreelarger

problems that shaped this project with the understanding that more focussed questions

would“emergeovertimeaccordingtotheneedsofthepractice”(Smith&Dean,2009:214).

The first research problem sought to consider the strategies that might be employed to

identify participants, locate performance/workshop spaces, and design workshops with

members of Civil Society, Militants/Ex-militants, and the Armed Forces in Kashmir. The

second research problemwas centredon the execution of devised theatreworkshops: to

analysechangesintheworkshopdesignbasedontheneedsofeachparticipantgroupandto

critically reflect on the outcomes of each workshop. The third research problem was

focussedonthecreationofoneperformancepiecethatwouldintegratenarrativesobtained

in the different workshops. The primary consideration here was whether it would be

possibletocreatecross-communityImmersiveTheatreexperienceswheremembersofCivil

Societymightbe immersed inexperiencesof theArmedForcesandMilitants/Ex-Militants;

whereMilitants/Ex-militantsmight be immersed in experiences of the Armed Forces and

CivilSociety;wheresoldiersfromtheArmedForcesmightbeimmersedinexperiencesofthe

Civil Society andMilitants/Ex-Militants.However,while itwas intended for this project to

address all three aforementioned problems and their subsidiary questions, the constant

need for the practice to evolve in response to the context,meant that only the first two

problems were investigated and explored within the scope of this doctoral project. In

drawingaconclusiontothisthesisthen,Ishalldiscusstheprimaryoutcomesofmyworkin

Kashmir64inrelationtothethirdresearchproblem,usingasaframeworkthequestionsthat

Rustom Bharucha poses (in Mackey & Fisher, 2011:366): “When the play ends, what

remains?Whentheplayends,whatbegins?”

64ThetimelineinAuto-EthnographicExcerpt1alsomentionspre-doctoralprojectsthatoccurredbetween2009and2013.Theseoutcomeshavebeenincludedsoastoprovidethereaderwithanunderstandingoftheprogressioninmyideasleadingintothisdoctoralproject.

153

2009-----2010------2011----------------2012-----------------------2013---------------------2014----------------2015--

Tocreatecross-communityImmersive&DocumentaryTheatreperformancesthat:immerseCivilSocietyintheexperiencesofMilitants/Ex-militantsandgovernmentsoldiers(&)immersegovernmentsoldiersintheexperiencesofMilitants/Ex-militantsandCivilSociety(&)immerseMilitants/Ex-militantsintheexperiencesofCivilSocietyandgovernmentsoldiers.Eachoftheseimmersiveexperienceswouldemergefromsingle-communityworkshopsthatwouldthenbeperformedforOther-communityaudiences:thelargergoalbeingtohumanisetheOther.

Toconductsingle-communityworkshopsthatresultinperformancesforcross-communityaudiences(OR)Toconductcross-communityworkshopsthatwouldresultinmulti-dimensionalpieces(OR)Toperformcross-communityperformancesforsingle-communityaudiences.

AsaresultoftheprojectsinAnantnag,Theneedtoidentifytheappropriatelocalpartnerspresenteditself;partnerswhowouldbothunderstandtheevolvingpremisesoftheprojectandunderstandthelanguageofthetheatre.Thischoice,toworkwithonetheatrecompanyasthecentralpartner,meantthattheprojectdesignneededtoshiftaccordingly.

Italsoemergedinthistimethatworkingwithactivemilitantswouldnotbe

possible,thefirstfailedattemptswiththeArmedForcesoccurred,asdidthechancetoworkwith

militarycadets.Theearlier

objectivebecamenuanced:nottosimplisticallyhumanisethe

Otherbuttousetheatretoexploregrey

zonesbetweenthethreegroups.

CagesemergedincollaborationwithEKTA--

cementingEKTA’scentralitytothisdoctoralproject,andbringingupotherquestionsaroundaffect,processbasedspectatorship,

anddominant/lessdominantnarratives.

WorkshopswithEKTAthatusedstrategieslike

interviewsandarchivalresearchtocreate

performancesaboutMilitantandArmedForces

experiences.Theunanticipatedfactthat

manyEx-militantshadnoideaofwhattheatreis,

alongsidethefailedattemptstoreachoutto

theArmedForces,furtherunderscoredthecentrality

ofoneCivilSocietycollaboratorthatalloweda

theatricalexplorationofgreyzones.

Sincecross-communityaudienceswerehardto

ensure,giventherisksofperformingcontentious

narrativesthroughexperimentalforms,EKTAhadcontroloverwhosawthepiece.Thedirectorof

EKTAtriedtoensurecross-communityaudiences

wherepossiblebuttherewasclearlyabiasinwho

sawthepieces.

Thefurtherrefinedproblembecame:toexplorewhatsomeofthegreyzones

mightbewithinthegroups;tofindmorenuancedways

ofarticulatingtheimportanceofprocess-

basedspectatorshipreassertsitself

Auto-ethnographicExcerpt2:Anevolutionofobjectives/strategies

“Whentheplayends,whatremains?Whentheplayends,whatbegins?”Forthecollaborators:EKTA,theinterviewees,andtheresearcher

What remains andwhat begins in this project ismost visible in the central collaboration

betweentheEnsembleKashmirTheatreAkademi(EKTA)andthisresearcher.ThefirsttimeI

walked into EKTA’s premises was on the heels of pre-doctoral workshops in Anantnag,

wherearenewedfocusonmyaestheticchoicesandamorenuancedunderstandingofthe

154

risks involved inworkingacrossoppositional community lines inKashmir suggested that it

wouldbemostfeasible(ethically,aesthetically,pedagogically)tocollaboratewithanexisting

theatregroup.Itwasthissingularchoicethatinturnledtothemostsignificanttraceofthis

researchbeingtheevolutionofmyrelationshipwithartistsinEKTA.

During the creationofCages in 2013, Iwas verymuchEKTA’s ‘guest’ and there existed a

formality between the Kashmiri artists and myself. This was visible for example, in how

spaceswere navigated at EKTA’s premises: a two storied building that consists of various

rooms which function as bedrooms, offices, a kitchen, and a library. In these spaces,

contextual inter-personaldynamics leadto individualscongregatingasandwhenthey like,

regardless of whether or not a particular space is where someone sleeps. As one might

expectthen,duringmyfirstvisit,therewerestrictunderstandingsofdecorumthatguided

howmy personal space – as a female, guest director – was dealt with. Only two of the

younger actors would come into ‘my’ room during the process of Cages and in order to

engageinformallywithothermembersoftheteam,itwasuptometoseekoutthespaces

in which the artists might be congregating. Furthermore, apart from EKTA members’

considerations asmy ‘hosts’,my own reticence as a ‘guest’ and as a ‘woman’ in amale-

dominatedtheatrecompanyalsoshapedthehost-guestdynamic.

ThisrelationshipwithEKTAevolvedhowever,whenIwasabletoinviteandhostthegroup’s

performances--CountryWithoutaPostOfficeandTrunouve--attheschool inwhichIwas

teaching in western India. The reversal of the host-guest relationship when EKTA artists

becamemyguestswasanindispensableelementinthedevelopmentofourcamaraderie;a

reciprocalhost-guestdynamicwhichcomplementedadialogicprocessofskillbuilding.Over

thelastthreeyearsIhavebeentoldbyvariousmembersofEKTAthattheirexposuretothe

ImmersiveandDocumentaryTheatreforms,alongsidemyuseofadevisedtheatrepedagogy

that is in contrast to the more traditional director-actor relationship to which they are

accustomed, has benefited them immensely. Similarly, since Immersive and Documentary

Theatrewere less-known dramatic forms forme – one of the reasons behind their being

chosen as the two aesthetic concepts for this project – working with EKTA has led to a

developmentinmyownskillsasadirector/facilitator.Thissharedsenseofskillbuildinghas

alsobeenfurtheredbythewillingnessofEKTAtosharetheirpersonalrepertoiresaboutthe

Kashmiricontextwithinandoutsidetheworkshopspaces,augmentingmyunderstandingof

155

Kashmir. After an initially formal host-guest dynamic in Cages therefore, EKTA and my

relationship has seen a significant shift. Now, no longer is ‘my room’ at EKTA the guest

director’sprivatespace;instead,itisacommunalspaceinwhichtheartistsenterandleave

as theyplease: tochat, toread, totalk,orchargetheircell-phones.Whiletherearesome

elementsofthehost-guestdynamicthatstillpersist,theevolutioninhowmypersonalspace

hascometobeviewedisoneveryobviousdemonstrationofhowEKTAandmyrelationship

hasevolvedthroughthisproject.

The centrality of EKTA to this project has also led to a cognisance of who cannot be

collaborators for a cross-community project across ‘victim’ and ‘perpetrator’ lines in

Kashmir. For instance the required change in this project’s target audience from active

MilitantstoEx-militants,nottomentionthemanyfailedattemptstoengagewiththeArmed

Forces, has led to the conclusion that in a conflict zone sustained theatrical engagement

mightnotbepossiblewiththosewhoareactive fighters. Iclarify thisstatementbysaying

thatsustained interactionsarenotpossiblesincemyencounterswith theColonel indicate

thatthereissomemanoeuvringspacewithindividualfighterswhoseethevalueintheatre

practice; albeit with varying agendas. However, even these micro-level interactions with

activecombatantsbecamemoreprobablebecauseofanexistingrelationshipwithEKTA;a

relationship that seemed to function as ‘proof’ of my legitimacy both as a theatre

practitionerandasanon-politicallymotivatedmainland Indian.AlthoughIamcertainthat

someindividuals/groupscouldnotbecollaboratedwithpreciselybecauseofmyconnection

withEKTA–giventhateachoftheartistsinEKTAhastheirowncomplexrelationshipstothe

context–moreoftenthannot,thisrelationshipwasvitaltothecross-communitypracticein

thisresearchbeingmadepossible.

The workshops with EKTA have also been integral in pointing toward an unexpected

dimension in my thinking around grey zones. As mentioned earlier, when I began this

project,itwaswiththeunderstandingthatthetermgreyzoneswouldreferquitegenerally

to potential spaces of interaction between the Armed Forces, Militants/Ex-Militants, and

CivilSociety inKashmir.However, thisworkhassuggestedthataside fromtheanticipated

dimensionsofgreyzonesvis-à-visthedemographyofaudiencemembersandthenarratives

contained in theatrical performances, themethodologyofmakingandperforming theatre

presentsasagreyzoneinKashmir.GiventhattheatricalactivityiscontentiousforKashmiris

156

who consider the art form to be against themandates of Islam, the very notion of being

present in a rehearsal space and/or performance becomes a complex act. Therefore, by

creatinganin-betweenspacejustbyvirtueofthenatureoftheactivity,thetheatrecomes

tooccupyaliminalspaceinKashmir--iffornooneelse,fortheartistswhochoosetopart-

take in thework.Theatricalactivitymanifestsasagreyzone,an in-betweenspace,where

non-hierarchicalpedagogicalstylesencountertraditionalhierarchiesthataredefinedbyage

andgender;wheredifferentculturalcodesthatexistwithinasimilartapestryoftraditions

from the Indian sub-continent provoke instances of coalescence and fracture; where a

mainland Indian director and Kashmiri artists can come together in an undertaking that

holds very real ramifications for eachoneof us.Usingperformative research anddevised

theatreworkshopsinKashmirtherefore,becamemethodologicalgreyzonesinthemselves.

As described in Chapter One, this project beganwith six concepts guiding its framework:

performative research, affect, devised theatre, Immersive Theatre, Documentary Theatre,

and performance auto-ethnography. While the methodological grey zones created by

performative research and devised theatre components has been mentioned above and

considerationsofaffectwillbediscussed later inthischapter, theoutcomesthatemerged

vis-à-vis my choices Immersive Theatre, Documentary Theatre, and performance auto-

ethnography do warrant some discussion here. With regards to the latter, performance

auto-ethnographywasa concept that I initially choseas anethical strategywithwhich to

guidemywayofseeing,being,andwritingaboutKashmir.Whatemergedhowever,wasthat

performanceauto-ethnographyinthisworkwasnotachoice;itwasanecessity.Asatheatre

practitionerfrommainlandIndia,whatIrepresentedinKashmirwasimpossibletoavoid:in

the workshops, in the performances, and in the writing of this thesis. The patriarchal

conditionsthatwerebeingaddressedinCagesdonotonlyaffectKashmiriwomen;theyalso

affectme, as someone froma similarly patriarchal cultural context. The stories thatwere

recounted in the interviews leading up to Meri Kahani Meri Zabani (MKMZ) and the

audienceresponsestotheperformanceshingedonwhat I represent intheValley. Ineach

phaseof this project therefore, performance auto-ethnographywas an indispensable lens

throughwhich to expandmy understanding of the grey zones that I occupy in Kashmir. I

wouldgoso faras tosaythen, thatwhenatheatrepractitionerchoosesto intervene ina

157

time and place of war where they are somehow implicated, an auto-ethnographical

componentisnotonlypreferable,itisnecessary.

Whilethechoiceofperformanceauto-ethnographywasonethatprovedtobevitaltoward

the larger goal of exploring the grey zones in this project, what was achieved with the

aesthetic choices of Immersive and Documentary Theatre is less clear. In terms of the

novelty of these techniques in Kashmir and the subsequent interest that they generated

amongst co-creators and spectators, the two aesthetic forms were appropriate choices.

However,itisdifficulttosayiftheinsightsthatweregleanedthroughtheuseofthesetwo

particularaestheticformswouldhavebeenanydifferentshouldIhavechosentoworkwith

more‘conventional’prosceniumtheatre.Now,withabetterunderstandingthatthetheatre

itself inhabits a grey zone in Kashmir, it is difficult to statewith certainty if the aesthetic

choicesthatweremadewere in factsignificanttotheoutcomesthatemerged. Immersive

andDocumentaryTheatreasaestheticframeworkswereinvaluabletomyowndesignofthe

workshops and conceptualizations of the performances. Nevertheless, these frameworks

were perhaps more useful to me as a practitioner creating new work rather than as a

researcherlookingtoexploregreyzonesbetween‘victims’and‘perpetrators’inKashmir.

Similarlyunknowableiswhatbeginsandremainsforthisproject’ssecondarycollaborators,

such as the interviewees in MKMZ. While the founder of the Association has sustained

contactwithmeoverthelasttwoyears,Iremainunsureastowhat–ifanything–JKHWA’s

collaborationwithMKMZmightsignifyfortheinterviewees.Althougheffortsweremadeto

invitealltheEx-militantintervieweestothefirsttrialperformanceofMKMZ,onlyfourofthe

originalintervieweesattendedtheshowingandgiventhatitwastheirfirsttimewatchinga

theatricalevent,theydidnothavemuchtosayabouttheaestheticshapewehadgiventheir

narratives.While one person did tellme: “You know,whenwewere in themilitancywe

werefightingagainstpeoplelikeyou,butIdidnotknowthatthiswaswhatwewerefighting

against. I didn’t know that this is what theatre was”65, and other statements have been

made to indicate the interviewees’ satisfactionwith simply being heard/listened to, I am

remindedoftheconstantrefrainfrommanyofour interviews:“Whatareyougoingtodo

65InthisresponseIunderstoodthespeakertobereferringtohispriorbeliefoftheatrebeingagainsttheIslamiccodeofconduct.ComingfromanEx-militant,thisstatementsuggeststhatthespeaker’spersonalbeliefsduringthemilitancywouldhavedistancedhimfromthelikes of EKTA andme. Furthermore, that his beliefs during themilitancymight have actually led him to consider us as opponents andpossiblycarryouteffortstostopourwork.

158

withourstories?”DespitemultipleeffortsonthepartofbothEKTAandmetoclarifythatwe

were ‘only’ creating a theatrical piece and could not in any way guarantee ‘effect’, our

clarificationsseemedtocomeacrossasinsipidinthefaceofthegravenarrativesthatwere

beingsharedwithus.AffectseemedaninsufficientjustificationtoMKMZ’sinterviewees(in

additiontothespectators),revealingthatthatwhilethisprojecthadpaidalotofattention

in itsframingoftheprocesstoco-creators inthetheatreworkshops, insufficientattention

hadbeenpaidtothe“theroleofthespectator,whichcouldbeoneofthemostmarginalised

categoriesintheatrediscourse”(BharuchainMackey&Fisher,2011:367).

“Whentheplayends,whatremains?Whentheplayends,whatbegins?”Forthespectators

WhileIremainunsureastowhetherImmersiveandDocumentaryTheatrewerenecessary

choicesofaesthetics,thecombinationoftheseformsinCagesandMKMZdidpresentmany

interesting possibilities vis-à-vis spectatorship. The novelty of these particular aesthetic

strategies inKashmirfacilitatedatenuousequilibrium“betweenthepleasureofdiscovery,

theunexpected,andtheunusual,ononehand,andthepleasureofrecognition,déjavu,and

theanticipatedontheother”(DeMarinis&Dwyer,1987:112).WhiletheprocessofCages

suggestedthatextremenoveltymightnotbethemostuseful/ethicalwaytotackleatheme

that contains multiple layers,MKMZ did put forth the potential that lies in integrating a

composedapproachtoDocumentaryTheatrewithmulti-sensorialstrategiesfromImmersive

Theatre to foster an intermediate novelty. Given the many kinds of responses that this

project elicited amongst spectators in Kashmir, my meditation on spectatorship in these

conclusionsisframedbyoneprimaryquestionthatrelatestoresearchproblemthree:ifan

outsidetheatremakerweretocreateoneperformancepiecethatcontainsnarrativesfrom

thegreyzonesinKashmir,whatethical,pedagogical,andaestheticconsiderationsmight

ariseasaresultofthisproject?

Consideration1:Balance

The layers of spectators’ responses to MKMZ and Cages have led to the emergence of

‘balance’ asan important framing idea.This importanceofbalancemightbewitnessed in

theaccount,below,fromFrederiqueLecomtewhosays:

159

First,youhavetohaveabalanceofactors…IdecidednottochooserealHutuandTutsiandTwabuttotakeactorswiththephysicalappearanceofHutu,thephysicalappearanceofTutsi. I learnedveryearlyonthat the first thing theaudiencedo iscounthowmanyHutus,howmanyTutsiandhowmanyTwa,andtheysay'OK,itisbalanced'basedontheappearance.Second,youhavetobalancethecrimescommittedbybothethnicgroups.For example, you have two columns. The Hutus' crimes are typically using 'machetes',cuttingofflimbs,poundingbabiesandsoon,whiletheTutsi'scrimesaretypicallymakingspears frombamboo, killing intellectuals, killing fathersof families...Then,whenpeopletellthetestimonyofaHutucrimethen,justafter,wehearaTutsicrime,anditislikethatsys-tem-at-ic-al-ly[sheemphasizes](Balfour,Hughes&Thompson,2009:181).

WhilethenatureofviolenceinBurundiisdifferentfromtheconflictsinKashmir,Lecomte’s

thoughtsonbalancecontinuetoberelevantinthiscontext.ReactionstoMKMZsuggestthat

in any theatrical performance that includes narratives of those who are considered

‘perpetrators’,aprecise,almostmathematicalcalculationisneededofhowthesenarratives

arebalancedby thevoicesof thosewhoareseenas ‘victims’.Upon furtherconsideration

around how such a balancemight be achieved in theatrical performance, I have come to

identifyonepossiblestrategy:toconsiderthegreyzonesthatarisewithineachcommunity

groupratherthantoonlycontemplatethenebulousspacesbetweenthem.Bywithin,Irefer

tonarrativesthatarecontainedwithintheindividualcategoriesofCivilSociety,Militants/Ex-

Militants,andArmedForcesthatarelessdominanti.e.theexperiencesthatdonotconform

to the grand narratives that frame each of these groups’ positioning in Kashmir.

Consequently,whilegrey zoneswere initially conceptualisedasbeing sitesof intervention

betweenCivilSociety,Militants/Ex-militantsandtheArmedForces,thetermhasnowcome

toimplysitesofinterventionbetweenandwithineachofthelargeridentitygroups.Sowhat

arethesegreyzonesinKashmir?

Whenconsideringthegreyzonesbetweeneachofthethreegroups,Kashmirisoldiersinthe

IndianArmedForcesandKashmiriEx-ArmedForcespersonneloccupyaspacebetweenthe

ArmedForcesandKashmiriCivilSociety.InconsideringgreyzonesbetweenCivilSocietyand

Militants/Ex-Militants, there emerge the narratives of Ex-Militants who have returned to

Civil Society and must deal with the grudges held against them by their communities.

Furthermore, this grey zonealso contains the voicesof thewives/childrenof Ex-militants,

especiallythewomenwhohavecometoIndianAdministered/OccupiedKashmirfromAzad

Kashmir(alsoreferredtoasPakistanAdministered/OccupiedKashmir).Finally,whenlooking

atthegreyzonebetweenMilitants/Ex-MilitantsandtheArmedForces,weneedtoconsider

160

the voices and narratives of the Ikhwanis who are comprised of Kashmiri Militants/Ex-

militants who are now sponsored by/work with the Indian government’s Armed Forces.

These grey zones between each of the three groups is then further complicated when

consideringthein-betweenspaceswithineachofthegroups.Forinstance,whenlookingat

greyzoneswithinCivilSocietyinKashmir,weencounterthenarrativesofKashmiriwomen,

theexperiencesofKashmiriHindus/PanditswholivewithinandoutsidetheKashmirValley,

and the perspectives of Kashmiri civilians who maintain economic ties with the Armed

Forces and Militants by supplying fighters with weapons, food, shelter, and information.

Likewise,withinthelargergroupingofMilitants/Ex-Militants,weencounterthegreyzones

that are occupied by incarcerated Militants/Ex-militants, militants who have joined the

militancyforreasonsotherthanideologicalgoals(suchasfinancialgain,forexample),and

we see grey zones within Militant/Ex-militant narratives in Kashmir when considering

women’srolesinthemilitancy.Finally,withintheArmedForces,weseegreyzonesemerge

in a consideration of the perspectives of military cadets who will one-day be posted to

conflict zones like Kashmir, of soldiers who are in Kashmir not because of an ideological

standpoint but for the financial security that the job affords, and of the narratives

surroundingsoldierswhoreachthepointofkillingthemselvesandtheircolleagues.

Inadditiontobalancingthevariousgreyzoneswithinandbetweeneachofthelargergroups

in a theatrical performance, the processes of Cages and MKMZ further suggest that

dominantnarrativesmustbalancethelesser-knownnarrativesfromthegreyzones;aneed

thatishighlightedwhenthetheatremakerinvolvedisfrommainlandIndia.Theinclusionof

dominant narratives seems to function (to the project’s non-participant spectators) as an

indicatorthattheresearcherinquestionhasdonetherequisiteamountofgroundworkto

understandtheKashmiricontext,thusmakingitmorelikelythatthelesserknownvoiceswill

notbeseenastheresearcher’sperformingapoliticalagenda. Inthisvein, itemergedthat

the two dominant narratives from Civil Society that need to be present in any theatrical

performance are those of civilians who have been victimised by the Armed Forces’ and

Militants’actsofviolenceandthevoicesofactivistswhoareengagedinnon-violentprotest.

WithinthelargercategoryofMilitants/Ex-Militants,thedominantnarrativesthatseemtobe

deemednecessaryarethosethatinvolveactivemilitantswhoarefighting/havebeenkilled

based on a commitment to their ideologies and those narratives which simultaneously

161

highlighttheMilitants/Ex-militantswhoarecorruptand/orhaveperpetratedactsofviolence

andinjusticeagainstKashmiricivilians.Andfinally,whenlookingatthedominantnarratives

about theArmedForces inKashmir, anygrey zoneapproach (like amentionof fratricide)

needs to be balanced by putting forward the narratives of soldiers who are driven by

nationalisticsentimentsandthosewhohavecommittedgraveviolationsagainstcivilians.

Thesetwodimensionstobalancetherefore–of lookingatgreyzoneswithineach identity

grouping that is then balanced by existing dominant narratives -- need to be carefully

calibrated in a performance that showcases multiple perspectives from Civil Society,

Militant/Ex-militant, andArmed Forces spectrum in Kashmir. This quest for balance, for a

theatre practitioner, then leads to the next question: what are aesthetic strategies that

wouldallowforsuchabalancingactofnarratives?

Consideration2:DramaticStrategies

The fragmented narrative can function as political action in many ways: It can resisttraditional academic systems, which may acknowledge alternate ways of knowing butnonethelesscontinueto locksociological inquiry intonormativeformsthatservetoreifythetraditionalsystemitself(Markham,2005:815-816).

Speaking to thepotentialof fragmentednarratives to create reflexivity for spectatorsand

creators alike, Annette Markham (2005:815-816) further extrapolates that “juxtaposition

and fragmentation help authors see—through disjuncture—their own habits of

interpretation,toreveal,oratleastquestion,taken-for-grantedpatternsofsensemaking”.

Fragmented narratives, therefore, seem to allow for an approach to argumentation and

aestheticcreationthatisnotlockedintoa“singleline”andinsodoing,“multiplicityismade

morepossible”(Markham,2005:815-816).Sincepowerfunctionsdifferently in fragmented

narratives as opposed to more linear/sequential counterparts, such performances “can

simultaneouslymaketheauthor’sparticularsetofargumentsandallowforalternativesby

revealingthepracticesatwork inthe interpretiveprocess” (Markham,2005:815-816).The

applicationofsuchafragmentationisalsosubstantiatedbywhatRolandBarthes(1977)calls

“the death of the author”; a framework in which the traditional role and power of the

‘Author-God’(orPlaywright/Director-Godinthiscase)ischallenged.AlthoughBarthes’essay

originallydiscussestherelationshipbetweenareaderandtheauthorofatext,there isan

obvious linktobemadewithhowafragmentednarrativemaymore likelyenableamulti-

162

dimensionalspaceinwhichthedirector–themainlandIndianoutsider,inthiscase--isno

longer ‘God’.Withtheseconsiderations inmind,a fragmentedapproachbecomesbothan

ethicalandaestheticstrategyforanoutsidertheatremakertocreateworkaboutgreyzones

in Kashmir. In this attempt to craft one fragmented performance piece about such grey

zones therefore, there isan inevitable intertextuality thatemerges: fromtheoutcomesof

theatre workshops/performances to that which is gleaned from the researcher’s auto-

ethnographic insights; from informationcontained inpublicallyavailablearchivalmaterials

to knowledge that is shared inmore private encounters. However, what is said/available

about narratives in Kashmir always needs to be considered alongside that which is

unsaid/silencedandinthisfraughtrelationship,thetheatremakermustconsidertheroleof

fiction.

The tension between reality and fiction has been widely considered in the realm of

DocumentaryTheatre,where“creatingperformancesfromeditedarchivalmaterialcanboth

foregroundandproblematize thenonfictionalevenas itusesactors,memorizeddialogue,

condensed time, precise staging, stage sets, lighting, costumes, and the overall aesthetic

structuringoftheatricalperformance”(Martin,2006:10).Therefore,althoughthisprocessof

merging fact and fiction is often murky, “documentary theatre creates its own aesthetic

imaginarieswhileclaimingaspecialfactuallegitimacy”(Martin,2006:10).Thus,whenHarold

Pintercallsforadistinctionbetweenacitizen’squestfor‘truth’ inoppositiontofalsehood

andanartist’sapproachtothenexusbetweentruthandfalsehood,he is furtheredbythe

likes of Debra Kalmanowitz (2013:38) who suggest that “the closer we get to fiction and

multiplicity the closer we sometimes are to the truth”. In a similar vein, Sundar Sarrukai

(2007b:1409)speakstotheimportanceoffictionbysayingthat“ifanthropologyiswillingto

gobeyondthisOtheritconstructsandintorecognisingitsfunctionasansweringtheethical

calloftheother,thenwewillhavetoaddresstherelevanceoffictionasethnographicdata”.

SarukkaiisbackedupbyCynthiaOznick(inMcNiff,2013:33)whosaysthat“withregardto

worksofliteraturerepresentingtheHolocaust”thatthe“rightsoffictionarenottherights

of history”. Oznick (inMcNiff, 2013:33) uses this postulation as a springboard to critique

thosewhoaccuseartisticworksthatdeviatefromdominantnarrativesforfalsifyingorde-

legitimisinghistory,byasking,“Whyshouldthemake-believepeopleinnovelsbeobligedto

concurwithhistory,ortoconfirmtoit?”

163

Therefore, although I remain uncertain if Immersive and Documentary Theatre were

necessarily themost appropriate aesthetic choices in this project, the centrality of fiction

and fragmented narratives to the execution ofCagesandMKMZ is an aesthetic outcome

thatIcontinuetoconsidersignificant.

Consideration3:TargetAudience

AnotherimportantconsiderationinthecreationofoneperformancearoundKashmir’sgrey

zonesinvolvesacarefulframingofwhothetargetaudienceofsuchworkmightbe.Wouldit

perhapsbemoreappropriate,ethicallyandpedagogically,foracross-communitypiecethat

alsogivesvoiceto‘perpetrators’tobefocussedtowardanon-Kashmiriaudienceratherthan

aKashmiri one?WouldaperformanceofKashmir’s grey zonesoutside the region lead to

less problematic “webs of significance” (Thompson, 2003:70)? I say that “webs of

significance” outside Kashmirmight be less problematic as a result of a cross-community

performancesincethecreationofnewandunpredictablenetworksof“socialenergy”within

Kashmircontainstheriskofbeingdangerous(Thompson,2003:70).Anexampleofpossibly

dangerous“socialenergy”mightbeseeninaninstanceafterCages,whenIreceivedaphone

call from theArmedForces’ Colonelwhohadbeenoneof the spectator-participants. The

Colonelmentionedthathehadbeenreceivingphonecallsfrom“suspicious”numbersafter

hisvisit toEKTAandsinceCageswastheonlyeventduringwhichhehadhandedoverhis

cellularphone(totheartistsforsafekeepingduringtheperformance),theColonelwantedto

knowifanymembersoftheensemblemighthavetamperedwithhisphone.Whilehewas

quick to accept my defence of EKTA’s integrity, this conversation revealed the tenuous

natureof the“socialenergy” thatCages inspired;onethatcouldhave,quiteeasily, led to

negativeoutcomesforEKTA.Similarly,whenwehadaspectatorinMKMZ’sAudienceBwho

said that “the only truth is the truth of the victims”, the Armed Forces’ escort of the

Brigadier’s daughter (who was an actor in the piece) took a visible interest in who this

spectator was: “Who was that man who got so angry?” he asked us at the end of the

evening; a question towhich EKTA and I provided a veiled and vague response, sincewe

wereunsurewhatthequestionimplied.Creating“websofsignificance”andespeciallycross-

community linksthuscomeswith immenseunpredictabilityandrisk inatimeandplaceof

war.

164

Thispossibilityleadsmetoconsiderthatthatperhapsthemostappropriatetargetaudience

for a cross-community performance that involves narratives of both ‘victims’ and

‘perpetrators’ would be one that is located outside Kashmir, in mainland India. This re-

articulationofthetargetaudiencepresentsthepossibilityforaninculcationof“freshmarks”

thataremadebetweenpeopleandgroups(Thompson,2003:70),butwithoutthebaggage

oflivingintheconflictzoneitself.Theramificationsofcreatingartasanoutsiderforatarget

audience living within that context might be seen in Shoot/Get Treasure/Repeat, which

speakstotheBirthofaNation.Inthisnation:

a teamof 'artist-facilitators'arrive ina ruinedcity,overwhelmedby theirownpersonalcrisesbutfullofgoodintentionstohealthewar-affectedcitizensofthecitythroughthedance,art,writingandperformance-installationworkshops. Inthefinalmomentsoftheplaytheartistscoerceablindwomanwhosetonguehasbeencutoutintoparticipatinginanartworkshop: 'tellusyourstory--pleasetellusofyourpainandstrugglesothatartcanbemadeandthehealingcanbegin'(RavenhillinHughes,2011:122)

Showing an audience of Kashmiris the perspectives of Militants/Ex-Militants/the Armed

Forcesmight very well encapsulate the irony of the blind woman in the example above,

wherethe justifiedresponseofmanyspectatorsbecomes:“Whyareyoushowinguswhat

wealreadyknow?”Therefore,someofthemorecontentiousoutcomesthathaveemerged

from conversations after, and critical analyses of,Cages andMKMZ suggest that theone

performance piece that EKTA and I are currently working on might best be performed

outsideKashmir,inmainlandIndia.JustasThisisCampX-Ray“radicallyre-placedtheCuban

site, firmly located in the shadows, to a prominent local site, evidencing a link between

'here'and'there'”(Balfour,Hughes&Thompson,2009:300;quotationmarks inoriginal),a

performancepiecethattargetsmainlandIndiamightradicallydemonstratea linkbetween

the non-Kashmir-here and the Kashmir-there. However, while focussing one cross-

communityperformanceabout grey zones inKashmir toward the target audienceofnon-

Kashmiris has its own potential, it must then be considered what the positioning of my

Kashmiricollaboratorswouldbeinthisscenario.

Cages and MKMZ, while inviting small groups of local audiences that EKTA and JKHWA

identified,were presented as ‘final’ performances i.e., as finished products by a Kashmiri

theatrecompanyincollaborationwithavisitingdirector.Theneedwhichemerged,tomore

carefullyframemyownintentionsasthefacilitator-director,ledmetowonderifitwasthis

165

‘finished product’ marketing of the work that made my non-political intentions seem

disingenuous. Although an effort was made to inform spectators that both pieces were

works-in-progress and thus, that audience members’ feedback would aid in the

development of the piece in question, it became evident that that was not how the

performanceswereviewed. Ina context likeKashmirwhere theatrical activity is relatively

minimal,awork-in-progressthatisperformedforinvitedspectatorswasviewedasbeingthe

samethingasafinishedperformance;especiallywithamainlandIndianinvolved.Withthis

inmind,whatifmorecarewastakentohighlightthe‘unfinished’qualityoftheworkwhile

simultaneouslyframingthepieceastargetingtheconsciousnessofmainlandIndians?What

iftheperformanceswerecreatedasdramaticreadings,whereactorsalwayshavethescripts

intheirhands,toremindtheaudiencethatthepieceisunfinished?Wouldthisperformative

strategyenabletheKashmirispectators’tosituatethepieceasbeingunfinished,andthus,

stimulateconstructivefeedbackratherthancontentiousdisputes?ReturningtoAllenTough

(1971), who says that adults learn best when they see a reason for doing so, would the

objectiveofhelpingdevelopaperformancethatultimatelytargetsmainlandIndiansbeseen

asreasonenoughforKashmirispectators’less-contentiousengagement?

Althoughthisframingdoesseemtocontainpotential,itmustbementionedthatanyeffort

toperformnarrativesfromKashmirinthe‘mainland’comeswithitsowncomplications.Late

in2014,asIwritethisconclusion,amoviecalledHaider(2014)hascomeintothespotlight

forshowcasingKashmir.ABollywoodadaptationofShakespeare’sHamlet,Haiderdrawsin

narrativesfromtheKashmirimilitancyandstarssomeofmycollaboratorsfromEKTA.While

myEKTAcolleaguesspeakpositivelyabouttheeffortthefilmmakestodepictthe‘reality’of

Kashmirand takeKashmirisvoices intoaccount,Haiderhasbecomeacontroversial film --

from critiques around the film’s credits where the Indian Armed Forces’ are thanked for

havinghelped flood victims in Kashmir; to commentaries around the stereotypes that are

being propagated about Kashmiri women in the film; to questions about the absence of

certaindominantnarratives.PerformingKashmirinmainlandIndiatherefore–throughfilm,

theatre, literature, or anything else – is no less contentious than performing Kashmir to

Kashmiris.Asaresult,itmustbeacknowledgedthatthereareveryrealriskstoartistswho

take narratives of Kashmir outside the Kashmiri context. In another instance, a festival of

non-commercial filmswascuratedbyaKashmiriPandit inearly2013andtakentovarious

166

cities across mainland India with the objective of drawing attention to lesser-known

perspectivestotheconflictsintheregion.Whilethescreeningsproceededwithouteventin

the initial phase of the tour, in the city of Hyderabad, a “mob vandalised screening

equipment and carried away a laptop belonging to the “curator of the film festival” (The

New IndianExpress,2013).Although the film festival found“safe sanctuaries” indifferent

cities(TheHindu,2013),thisoccurrencehighlightsaquandaryforme.Ifafilmfestivalsuch

as this could turn violent, what would be the consequences of a cross-community

performance that explores the grey zones in Kashmir being performed outside Kashmir?

Giventhetangiblerisks involved inaddressingKashmir’s issues inmainland India,would it

be any safer for EKTA actors to performgrey zonenarratives to an audienceofmainland

Indians?So, if thebroadtargetaudienceofmainland Indianscontains risk,whatmightbe

the kinds of settingswhere the physical riskswould bemore negotiablewhen seeking to

reach non-Kashmiri audience? Revisiting my own practice in Kashmir and looking at the

kinds of sites fromwhich the abovementioned film festival seemed to have garnered the

most support for its screenings, it is perhaps unsurprising that educational environments

emergeasthemostappropriatesitesforsuchperformance-basedinterventions.

In addition to educational environments being comprised of captive audiences who are

morelikelytobepredisposedtoseeingtheOtherforthereasonsrelatedtoanexpansionof

(intangible) educational outcomes, these environments also lend themselveswell towhat

hasbeendiscussedearlierinthisthesisasaprocess-basedspectatorship.Theimportanceof

aprocess-basedspectatorshipmightbeseen in theexperienceof theFreedomTheatre in

Palestine,whosedirectorJulianMer-Khamis(inMee,2012:170)says“tocreateanaudience

isharderthantocreateactors”.SpeakingtotheFreedomTheatre’sexperience,Mer-Khamis

(inMee,2012:170)saysthatittookthem“ayeartobeabletodimthelights”,anadditional

“threeyearstogetpeoplenottotalkthroughtheshow”,and“fiveyearsexplainingtothe

audiencewhattheirrole in livetheatre is”;allbecause“thereweremanypeoplewhohad

neverseenlivetheatrebefore”.Process-basedspectatorshipisthereforeinfluencedbythe

notionthat“themoreoftenweencounterorexperienceasensation,emotion,orsituation,

themorefamiliaritbecomesandtherebycreatesamoredistinctpathwaywithinourbrain”

(DiBenedetto,2010:16).Therefore,thisapproachtospectatortraining isnotsimplyabout

makingsurethattheaudienceunderstandsthecontextofthepieceandmitigating,tosome

167

extent,theanxietythatafirst-timeexperienceofaformlikeImmersiveTheatremightcause

forspectators.Rather,trainingspectatorsbecomessimilarinitspedagogicalunderpinnings

totheworkofactortraining,whereitisrecognisedthatbeingaspectatoralsoinvolvesthe

necessity for certain skill-sets. Josephine Machon (2013:278-279), for instance, says that

“immersiveworkhastoenabletheaudiencetobewillingparticipants,toinvitecuriosityand

complicity” (emphasis in original) and that “artists can encourage this desire to engage

through pre-performance techniques”. These pre-performance techniques could “include

thejourneytotheevent;practical instructionandguidanceintheidiolectoftheworld;or

antechamberswhichsteepusintheaestheticandmoodofthework”(Machon,2013:278-

279)andasanextension,thecreationofworkshopsforaudiencemembersbothpreceding

andfollowingaperformanceaboutKashmir’sgreyzonesbetweenCivilSociety,Militants/Ex-

militants,andtheArmedForces.

Returningtoanexplorationofwhyadultslearn,ithasbeenpointedoutthatadults“engage

inlearninglargelyinresponsetopressurestheyfeelfromcurrentlifeproblems”(Knowles,

1967:278). Therefore, since educational institutions are shaped around larger ideas of

learningandexpandingknowledge,aprocess-basedspectatorshipmightserveasaway in

which to underscore the possible pedagogical relevance of Kashmir’s complexities to the

everydaylivesofnon-Kashmiris.Inmanyways,thisdiscussionofspectatorshiprelatestoDe

Marinis’ideasoftheModelSpectatorwhereinthereisacertainkindofspectatorforwhom

aworkof theatre iscreatedand if“aclosedperformance isperformedforaspectator far

removedfromitsModelSpectator,thenthingswillturnoutratherdifferently”(DeMarinis

&Dwyer,1987:103).Given thecontentiousnatureofaperformance thatworkswithgrey

zones in Kashmir; a conflict aroundwhich thatmanynon-Kashmirismighthave their own

views,aprocess-basedspectatorshipmightpresentawaytocreatethenecessaryconditions

forModel Spectators to emerge. It must be clarified here that I do not intend for these

process-basedeffortstoensurethatallspectatorsinterpretthepieceinthesameway,but

rather, I see theseprocessesascreating spaces inwhichspectatorsareprovidedwith the

tools with which they might contextualise the work. This filtering down of the target

audience therefore – to mainland Indians within educational contexts – becomes a

significantconsiderationwhenseeking tocreateonebalancedpiece thatuses fragmented

168

narrativesandfictiontocreateanImmersiveandDocumentaryTheatreperformanceabout

greyzonesinKashmir.

Consequently, in exploring who our audiences are and how they might respond to such

work,wereturntoquestionsofaffect.

Consideration4:Affect

Itmustbeadmittedthattheinitialconsiderationofaffectinthisproject(asinChapterOne)

wasentirelyunderdeveloped.TakingJamesThompson’sarticulationsaroundthenopointof

affect as the primary point of departure, the reasoning behind my underdeveloped

understanding of the implications of affect in Kashmir came from a concurrent ignorance

aboutthenuancesofthecontext.Affect,atthisstage,wassimplisticallycomparedtoeffect

and seemed to be themost ethical positioning that an outside theatre practitioner could

assume in Kashmir. Likening effect to the generation, and subsequent

articulation/measurement,oftangibleoutcomesandconcretesolutions,theinferencethat

affectsareeffectswasanuancethatdidnotseemnecessarytoexplore.Sincethedoctoral

project was initially framed around identifying the grey zones between three particular

identity groups and ascertaining the ethical, pedagogical, and aesthetic implications of

making theatre across the ‘victim’/’perpetrator’ binary in Kashmir, a basic usage of the

conceptofaffectwasdeemedasbeingsufficient.However,nowthatthepracticeofmaking

theatreonthegroundhasrevealedsomeofthelayersandcomplexitiestosuchwork,Ihave

cometothinkthattheaffect/effectbinarymightnotbethemostusefultoolwithwhichto

analysehowtheatreintervenesinaconflictzone.Whileaffectandeffectwereworthwhile

conceptswithwhichtobeginthisprojectandarticulatewhatmighthappenforspectatorsas

aresultofmypractice,theydidnothelpanswerthequestionthat Igetasked inKashmir:

what can theatre do? Or as I interpret this question, how can theatrical experiments

intervenewithintheexistingstatusquooftheconflict?Asaresultofthisprojecttherefore,I

have come to consider if by findingways tomoremethodically analyse bothwhat artists

intendtoaccomplishandtheresponsesthatareevoked,theremightemergeaheightened

potential to understand how theatre intervenes in a conflict zone. Unable to disentangle

myself fromthecontextsandcomplexitiesof the terminologyofaffectandeffect though,

this project has led me to reframemy consideration by using the less charged terms of

169

intentionandresponse.Inthisapproach,Isuggestthatitmightbeusefultoconsiderwhata

theatrepractitionerintendstoprovokeinatimeandplaceofwar;beforemovingontothe

responsesthatmanifestamongspectators.

When contemplating the possible interactions between artistic intention and spectator

responses, itemergedashelpfultoconsidertwodifferentdimensionstothespectatorship

process:receptionprocessesandreceptionresults.Inthisdistinction,theformerconsiders

“what audiences are thinking, doing, feeling while watching a performance, and in the

secondcase,theyinvestigateaudienceresponsetoaperformanceaftertheevent”(Ginters,

2010:9). In concluding this thesis therefore, I propose twokinds interactionsbetween the

intention of the artists and the responses of spectators: one that focusses on reception

processes and the second that focusses on reception results. The two cases of

intention/responseinteractionsthatareproposedbelowareseenasstartingpointstoassist

amore careful articulation of both the potential and limitations of theatre in a time and

placeofwar;considerationsthatwarrantresearchbeyondthisdoctoralundertaking.

Case1

AsIreflectonmyexperience,however,IaskmyselfifandhowIhavereallychanged.WillIswitchcareerstofightfortherightsofrefugees?WillIdonatetimetoeasetheirplight?WillIdomorethanputmoneyintheboxbythecashregisterforrefugeesfromRwandaor Kosovo or Afghanistan or wherever the next conflict forces its citizens into exile?Probablynot.Andyet . . . I am transformed.Wanmin is stillwithme.Her identity andminehavemerged,and I seeher/my facewhen Ihearstoriesabout refugees. I lookatissuesofimmigrationwithdifferenteyes(Haedicke,2002:115).

InCase1of intention/response interactions, I includeworks inwhichthere isan intention

fromthecreatorstoprovokeaspecificresponseamongstspectatorsaftertheperformance

endsi.e.aftertheaudiencemembersleavetheperformancespace.Forinstance,apiecelike

Cheminsclearlyintendsforitsaudiencestobecomemoreawareof,andsensitisedtoward,

policiesaffectingasylumseekersintheEuropeanUnion.Similarly,CagesandThisisCampX-

RaycreateimmersiveexperiencestoplacethespectatorintotheshoesofanOthersoasto

create an outcome of sensitisation, awareness, and critical empathy.While there are, of

course,multipleuncontrollableandintangibleresponsesthatarealsoinherentinsuchforms

of embodied spectatorship (i.e. in the reception processes rather than results),

performances like Cages, Chemins, and This is Camp X-Ray seek to catalyse a social

consciousness about a very specific political issue – the experience of relational violence

170

against Kashmiri women in Cages, the plight of imprisoned Manchester residents in

GuantanamothroughThisisCampX-Ray,andthestatusofasylumseekersintheEuropean

UnioninChemins.Thetracesthatthese immersivepiecesseekto leave intheirspectators

aredesiredto“lastbeyondtheevent”and“linger”(Thompson,2005:235).Bylingering,like

Thompson, I mean that the response “does not have to happen at the moment of the

performancebutcaneitherbesustainedbeyonditoroccuratadifferenttime”.Therefore,

itmightbesaidthatperformancesinCase1hingeontheartist’sintentionfora“memorial

afterlife”(Ginters,2010:12).

In addition to a focus on the artists’ intendedmemorial afterlife for their spectators, this

projecthas ledmetoconsider the importanceofevaluatingreceptionresults inacontext

thatisbothanactiveconflictzoneandishostiletotheatreitself.Inadditiontobeingcrafted

withclear intentions foramemorialafterlife then,performances inCase1wouldneed to

employ strategies to assess themanifestation of their intended reception results so as to

legitimisethetheatricalundertaking.ItisimportanttoclarifyherethatwhenIspeaktothe

need for legitimizing a place for theatre in an active conflict zone, I refer specifically to

longer-term repercussions of artistic efforts in a place like Kashmir. While intersections

betweenintentionandresponsemightnotbeasrelevanttotheatrepractitionerswhoare

involvedinshort-term/one-offprojectsorthosewhodonotworkinactiveconflictzones,I

havecometoconsiderthecentralityoftheseconceptsforartisticcollaborations–likethat

between EKTA and myself – which recur over longer periods of time. Therefore,

pedagogically, providing spectators with ‘evidence’ of the afterlife of prior performances

could become a way in which to invite their return to subsequent efforts. Furthermore,

ethically,evaluatingthemanifestationofaperformance’sintendedafterlifemightalsobea

way inwhich to guarantee the safety of the artistswho are involved in the undertaking.

FindingwaystoclearlystateintentionsandevaluatetheafterlifeoftheatreworkinKashmir

might be the only way in which we – EKTA andmyself -- might protect ourselves in the

longertermfromtheveryrealriskstooursafety.

In the context of this project,while spectators to bothMKMZ andCageshave spoken of

theirmemoriesofbothperformances inmysubsequentvisitstoKashmir, Iwonder ifsuch

anecdotal evidence is sufficient with which to legitimise the space for theatre in a place

where:a)theatricalactivityisseenaspossiblybeingagainstanIslamiccodeofconduct;b)

171

theconflictsare still activeandno resolutions seem imminent; c) spectatorsaregenerally

waryofanoutside theatremaker’s intentions in thecontext.Returning to theexampleof

Cages,where thenatureof thepieceaims for apotential change inpatriarchal attitudes,

howdoesa theatre researchergoaboutassessing thenatureof the responsegenerated?

Thepotentialhereseemstoliewithinevaluationstrategiesthattakefromtherealmofthe

social sciences to assess a performance’s memorial afterlife through the use of carefully

framedmethods.66Whileadeeperconsiderationofassessmenttoolsfallsoutsidethescope

ofthisthesis,IconsiderprojectsinCase1toincludeartisticeffortsthatintendtostimulatea

particularmemorialafterlifeandfurthermore,thatdesignmethodswithwhichtoassessthe

natureofthatafterlife.

Case2

The artist’s intention for amemorial afterlife is the primary point of distinction between

Case1andCase2oftheintention/responseinteractions.IncontrasttoworksinCase1that

focusonreceptionresults,inCase2,Iconsiderworksthatfocusonreceptionprocessesand

ontheexperiencethat iscreatedforspectators intheperformancespace.Thecreators in

thiscasedonotintendfor,trytocontrol,orseektopredicthowspectators’responsesmight

manifestonce they leave theperformance spaceand there isnoafterlife that is intended

(although,ofcourse,anafterlifemightverywelloccur).Forinstance,thiswastheapproach

that we took with MKMZ; focussing on creating a provocative experience for spectators

duringtheperformance,withoutseekingtocontrolwhatwouldhappenwhentheyleftthe

performancespace.AlthoughIusedDocumentary/ImmersiveTheatrewiththelargerideaof

creatingtheatricalscenariosaboutEx-militantsandtheirnarrativesinKashmir,therewasno

desire or attempt to control how MKMZ’s spectators channelled that experience. While

Cagessought tosomehowcreateamemorialafterlifeofcriticalempathy towardKashmiri

women, MKMZ presented provocative scenarios to heighten spectators’ reception

66Whileadetailedconsiderationofpossibleevaluationmechanisms isoutsidethescopeofthisdissertation,hereisanexampleofanevaluationmechanismthatmightbeusedforapieceCages.Usingtheframeworkofanendorsementexperiment,respondentsmightbedividedintocontrolandtreatmentgroupswheretreatedindividuals [those who are spectator-participants to Cages] are asked to rate their support for anuncontroversialpolicythat isendorsed(implicitly) intheperformance.Those inthecontrolgroupareshownthesamepolicywithouttheendorsementi.e.theserespondentsdonotparticipateinCages.So,forexample,iftherespondentswereaskedtoratetheirsupportforapolicythatseeksmorewomen’sparticipationin localgovernment,wouldaspectator-participanttoCagesbemorelikelytosupportthepolicyascomparedtothosewhodidnotcometotheperformance?(ThisapproachtotheendorsementexperimenttakesfromShaverandZhou,2015).

172

processes.Althoughthispositioningeventuallybecameproblematic,IpresentMKMZasan

exampleofCase2sincetherewasaconsciousattempt(bythecreators)tonotcontrolhow

ourworkshouldmanifestonceourspectatorsleftEKTA’spremises.InCase2therefore,as

Thompson states (2009:111), the objective is simply to rouse “individuals to possibilities

beyondthemselveswithoutaninsistenceonwhattheexperienceis–whatmeaningsshould

beattached”.

Thatsaid,whileThompson’sdefenceofthisreceptionprocessorientedapproachmightbe

extremely relevant toacontextwhere theatre isanacceptedactivity, inanactiveconflict

zone where theatre itself is a grey zone, rousing individuals to possibilities without an

articulatedemphasisonwhattheexperiencemightbecouldbecomepotentiallydangerous.

Forexample, inresponsetoMKMZ, itwasthisquestionthatseemedto lieattheheartof

many of our spectators’ critique: what meaning were we attaching to the Ex-militants’

stories?Andwhenwerefusedtoattachmeaningsasthecreators,itwasperhapsinevitable

that our spectatorswould add thosemeanings themselves. In contexts like Kashmir then,

wherenot insistingonthemeaningofanexperiencecouldhavedangerousconsequences,

artistic undertakings might benefit from a consideration of how spectators’ reception

processescouldalsobeevaluated.Althoughreceptionprocessesareperhapsmoredifficult

to assess than reception results, links between spectatorship studies and Cognitive

Neuroscience do point toward tools that might become useful in such a quest. While a

detailedconsiderationoftheseconceptsfallsoutsidethescopeofthisresearch,67similarly

toCase1,acleararticulationofwhathappenstospectatorsduringatheatricalperformance

couldbecomeapedagogicalandethicalstrategywithwhichto justifyhowtheatricalwork

intervenesinanactiveconflictzonelikeKashmir.

Theabovementionedproposalsofresponse/intentionintersectionsarepresentedhereasan

initial articulationof a larger project thatwarrants further research. In the constant need

thatemergedduringthisprojecttojustifywhatmightremain/beginoncemyperformances

inKashmirend,acentralcomponenttomyresearchfollowingthisdoctoralprojectwillbea

more careful consideration of how the two cases I propose above link back to existing

scholarshiparoundaffectandeffect.

67 In consultationwith Dr.Mark Solms at the University of Cape Town’s Psychology department, some of the relevant concepts fromCognitive Neuroscience that have been identified are: Rough and Tumble Play (Panksepp, 1998), the Body Swap Illusion (Petkova &Ehrsson,2008),andRealityTestingandMonitoring(PrigatanoandSchacter,1991).

173

“Whentheplayends,whatremains?Whentheplayends,whatbegins?”

When Primo Levi (1988) used the term grey zones, he used it to describe the complex

positioning of Jewishmen andwomenwho held positions of (relative) power in theNazi

establishment.However,asstatedearlier,greyzoneswasusedinthisprojecttoencapsulate

the in-betweenspacesbetweenthreeparticulargroupingsofpeople inKashmir.Whilemy

own fluid approach to the term remained consistent through the various phases of this

projectandwasessentialtothepractice-basedevolutionoftheresearch,asIconcludethis

thesis, I am forced to consider if itmightbepossible forme tonowoffer amoreprecise

articulationofwhatKashmir’sgreyzonesmightbe.WasLeviable topreciselyarticulatea

greyzonebetween‘victim’and‘perpetrator’--ofthe‘victim’whois‘perpetrator’–because

hewroteaftertheHolocaustandnotduringit?Furthermore,wasLeviabletoarticulatesuch

a grey zone because therewas amore easily identifiable ‘victim’ and ‘perpetrator’ in the

context of the Holocaust; as against a context like Kashmir where the terms ‘victim’ and

‘perpetrator’ are used differently by variously invested parties?Was Levi’s articulation of

thisgreyzonealsolesscontentiousbecausehewasasurvivoroftheHolocausthimself?And

iftheanswertothesequestionsisintheaffirmative,whatdoesaprojectlikethisoneenable

ustodiscernaboutthegreyzonesofKashmir?

As mentioned earlier in this conclusion, the workshops and performances in this project

have led to the identificationof variousgrey zonesbetweenandwithin the threegroups:

spaces in which the concepts of victimhood and perpetration become murky. And yet,

looking at these spaces between and within the categories of Civil Society, Militants/Ex-

militants, and the Indian Armed Forces seems insufficient in conveying the innumerable

pointsonthe‘victim’/’perpetrator’spectruminKashmir.Ihavecometowondertherefore,if

thetermgreyzonesrefersnot,primarily,tothe‘victim’/’perpetrator’spectrumasIinitially

envisioned.Instead,thetermmightbestrefertothespacescatalysedbytheuseoftheatre

as amethodology in an active conflict zonewhere artistic activity is itself contentious. It

might be said, then, that the theatrical process engenders the creation of grey zones in

Kashmir:wheredominantandlessdominantnarrativesmightcoalesceandfracture;where

narrativesofvictimhoodandperpetrationmightbeproblematisedandnuanced.Soperhaps

themoreappropriatefocusisnotonwhosenarrativesoccupygreyzones,buthowtheatre

functionsasagreyzoneacrossperspectivesofvictimhoodandperpetrationinKashmir.

174

IntheintroductionIpresentedashortpieceofauto-ethnographicwritingthatwascomposedaftermyfirsttriptoKashmir:onethatwashauntedbythestatement‘IndianDogsGoBack’.Now,inthefinalstagesofthiswork,Iamremindedofthisgraffitiagain,andofastatementmadebyaKashmirifriendwhenhenoticedmydiscomfortinresponsetothespray-paintedmessage…“ThatisnotmeantforIndianslikeyou”,hesaid;astatementthatsoundedthen,likeasimplisticdeflectionfromthemoreseriousundercurrentsbetweenKashmirisandmainlandIndians.Fouryearslater,Iwondernowifmyfriend’sstatementmightnothavebeenasglibasIthenthought.‘IndianDogsGoBack’maynotbemeantforIndianslikeme;infactitmaynotbemeantevenforallthesoldiersintheArmedForces.Instead,Ihavecometowonderifthesloganactuallytargetsacertainmind-set:amind-set,beitamongstmainlandIndians/Kashmiris/anyoneelsethatoverlookscomplexity.Thatoverlooksnuance.Thatoverlooksthespacebetweenseekingtounderstand/explainviolenceandstressingitsincomprehensibility.“Whyaren’tyoutellingourstory?”:aquestionthatisaskedofmebymanyindividualsinKashmir.Individuals,itseems,whowanttheirexperiencestobeperformeddespitetheriskscontainedinthattelling.Astheyarnunravelsthen,andasmoresuchinstancesoccur–ofpeopleapproachingmeratherthanmeapproachingthem–thepotentialforthisworktoevolveareindeedimmense.Potentialthatbothexcitesandterrifies;thatrevealsandobscures;that(over)complicatesand(over)simplifies;thatexists,entirely,ingreyzones.

TheFinalAuto-ethnographicExcerpt

175

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Abramović,M.1975.Artmustbebeautiful,artistmustbebeautiful[Performance].Copenhagen.

Abu-Ghosheh,J.1999.InterviewwithNassar,H.K.

Adorno,T.1970.Aesthetictheory.Frankfurt:SuhrkampVerlag.

Agamben,G.1999.RemnantsofAuschwitz:thewitnessandthearchive.NewYork:ZoneBooks.

Agamben,G.2005.Stateofexception.Chicago:UniversityofChicagoPress.

Ali,A.S.&Suleri,S.2000Ravishingdisunitites:realghazalsinEnglish.Hanover:UniversityPressofNewEngland.

Anderson,P.&Menon,J.Eds.2008.Violenceperformed:localrootsandglobalroutesofconflict.Palgrave-Macmillan.

AssociationofParentsforDisappearedPersons.Available:http://apdpkashmir.blogspot.in/[29March2013].

Arendt,H.1963.EichmanninJerusalem:areportonthebanalityofevil.NewYork:TheVikingPressInc.

Arendt,H.1981.Thelifeofthemind.MarinerBooks:1stHarvest/HBJEdedition.

Bacon,F.1605.TheAdvancementofLearning.Available:http://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/5500.[15February2014].

Balfour,M.2007.Performingwar:'militarytheatre'andthepossibilitiesofresistance.PerformanceParadigm#3.Available:http://www.performanceparadigm.net/index.php/journal/article/download/30/31.[15October2014].

Balfour,M.2009.Thepoliticsofintention:lookingforatheatreoflittlechanges.RiDE:TheJournalofAppliedTheatreandPerformance.14(3):347-359.

Balfour,M.2012.Mappingrealities:representingwarthroughaffectiveplacemaking.NewTheatreQuarterly.28(1):30-40.

Balfour,M.,Hughes,J.&Thompson,J.2009.Performanceinplaceofwar,London:Seagull.

Barnard,R.2006.Oprah’sPaton,orSouthAfricaandtheglobalizationofsuffering.Safundi:TheJournalofSouthAfricanandAmericanStudies.7(3):1-21.

Barnes,H.2005.Whitemanwritingwomen:issuesofpower,genderandownershipinacollaborativecreation.SouthAfricanTheatreJournal.19:93-115.

Barrett,E.&Bolt,B.2007.Practiceasresearch:approachestocreativeartsenquiry.NewYork:I.B.Tauris&CoLtd.

Barthes,R.1977.Thedeathoftheauthor.InImage-Music–Text.S.Heath,Ed.NewYork:HillandWang.

Barthes,R.1993.Cameralucida:reflectionsonphotography.VintageClassics.

176

Baumeister,R.F.1997.Evil:insidehumanviolenceandcruelty.NewYork:W.H.Freeman.

Beah,I.2007.Alongwaygone:memoirsofaboysoldier.NewYork:Farrar,Strauss,andGiroux.

Becker,L.C.1995.Situationethics.InCambridgeDictionaryofPhilosophy.R.Audi,Ed.Cambridge:CambridgeUniversityPress.

Beckett,S.2011.WaitingforGodot.GrovePress:1stedition.

Ben-Zvi,L.2006.StagingtheotherIsrael:theDocumentaryTheatreofNoraChilton.TheDramaReview.50(3):42-55.

Berlyne,D.1960.Conflict,arousal,andcuriosity.NewYork:McGraw-HillBookCompany.

Bharucha,R.1993.Theatreandtheworld:performanceandthepoliticsofculture.London:Routledge.

Bharucha,R.2010.Problematisingappliedtheatre:asearchforalternativeparadigms,London:Routledge.

Boal,A.1985.Theatreoftheoppressed.NewYork:TheatreCommunicationsGroup.

Bourdieu,P.1984.Distinction:Asocialcritiqueofthejudgementoftaste.HarvardUniversityPress.

Brandt,G.2001.Thespisbehindthewire–apersonalrecollection.OxfordandNewYork:BerghahnBooks.

Brown,C.2013.Capturingthetransient.JournalofAppliedArts&Health.(4)1:117-124.

Browning,C.1992.Ordinarymen.NewYork:HarperCollins.

Bruneau,T.C.&Tollefson,S.D.2006.Whoguardstheguardiansandhow:democraticcivil-militaryrelations.Austin:UniversityofTexasPress.

Buber,M.1988[1923].Iandthou.NewYork:Macmillan.

Burke,G.2010.BlackWatch.Faber&FaberPlays.

Burke,J.2004.Theatreofterror.TheObserver.21November.

Butler,J.1990.Gendertrouble:feminismandthesubversionofidentity.NewYork:Routledge.

Butler,J.2004.Precariouslife:thepowersofmourningandviolence.London:Verso.

Butler,J.2009.Framesofwar:whenislifegrievable?London:Verso.

Carroll,R.2005.Iraqandthemedia:Trialbytelevision.TheGuardian.

Chou,M.&Bleiker,R.2010.Dramatizingwar:GeorgePackerandthedemocraticpotentialofVerbatimTheatre.NewPoliticalScience.32(4):561-573.

Conquergood,D.1985.Performingasamoralact:ethicaldimensionsoftheethnographyofperformance.LiteratureinPerformance.5:1-13.

Conquergood,D.1991.Rethinkingethnography:towardsacriticalculturalpolitics,CommunicationMonographs.58:179-194.

Deleuze,G.&Guattari,F.1987.Athousandplateaus:capitalismandschizophrenia.Minneapolis:UniversityofMinnesotaPress.

177

DeMarinis,M.&Dwyer,P.1987.Dramaturgyofthespectator.TDR:TheDramaReview.31(2):100-114.

Denzin,N.K.2003.Performanceethnography:thecalltoperformance.SAGEResearchMethodsOnlineedition:SAGE.

Denzin,N.K.2009.Acriticalperformancepedagogythatmatters.EthnographyandEducation.4(3):255-270.

DiBenedetto,S.2010.Theprovocationofthesensesincontemporarytheatre.NewYork:Routledge.

Dinesh,N.&EnsembleKashmirTheatreAkademi.2013a.Pinjare[Performance].Available:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xzmMLxDKDOs.Srinagar:EnsembleKashmirTheatreAkademi.

Dinesh,N.&NationalDefenceAcademy.2013b.Waiting…[Performance].Available:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BSeFRXF3TQ0.Pune:UWCMahindraCollege.

Dinesh,N.&EnsembleKashmirTheatreAkademi.2014a.Merikahanimerizabani[Performance].Available:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5p_QMC0rsa0.Srinagar:EnsembleKashmirTheatreAkademi.

Dinesh,N.2014b.ExperiencesinKashmir:anobligationto(my)story[VirtualPresentation]UniversityofExeter:ObligationsinContemporaryTheatreandPerformancePractices.

Dinesh,N.2014c.Solidarityandsoldier(ity):usingtheatreinmilitarycontexts.activate.3(1):47-57.

Dinesh,N.2015a.Delusionsofsingularity:aesthetics,discomfortandbewildermentinKashmir.ResearchinDramaEducation:TheJournalofAppliedTheatreandPerformance.20(1):62-73.DOI:10.1080/13569783.2014.975111.

Dinesh,N.2015b.In-betweenspaces:theatricalexplorationsfromRwandatoKashmir.SouthAfricanTheatreJournal.DOI:10.1080/10137548.2015.1011857.

Dinesh,N.2015c.Poeticsand(mis)representation:creatingtheatrewith/for/aboutex-militantsinKashmir.PerformanceResearch:AJournalofthePerformingArts.20(1):113-122.DOI:10.1080/13528165.2015.991581.

Diop,B.B.2006.Murambi:thebookofbones.Bloomington:IndianaUniversityPress.

Dixon,L.2010.Drama,conflictresolutionandthebirthofaKosovarNationalTheatre.JournalofWarandCultureStudies.3(3):275-286.

Dogra,C.S.2011.ArtOfPeace.Outlook.Available:http://www.outlookindia.com/article/art-of-peace/278168.[6May2015].

Dolan,J.2001.Performance,utopia,andthe"utopianperformative".TheatreJournal.53(3):455-479.

Dolan,J.2005.Utopiainperformance:findinghopeatthetheater.AnnArbor:UniversityofMichiganPress.

Duggan,P.2013.Others,spectatorship,andtheethicsofverbatimperformance.NewTheatreQuarterly.29(2):146-158.

178

Edmondson,L.2005.MarketingtraumaandthetheatreofwarinnorthernUganda.TheatreJournal.57:451-474.

Edmondson,L.2009.Genocideunbound:ErikEhn,Rwanda,andanaestheticsofdiscomfort.TheatreJournal.61:65–83.

Edmondson,L.2011.Confessionsofafailedtheatreactivist:interculturalencountersinUgandaandRwanda.InAvant-gardeperformanceandmaterialexchange.M.Sell,Ed.London:PalgraveMacmillan.

Ehn,E.2008.MariaKizito.InThetheatreofgenocide:fourplaysaboutmassmurder.R.Skloot,Ed.Madison:UniversityofWisconsinPress.

Enloe,C.2004.Thecuriousfeminist:searchingforwomeninanewageofempire.Berkeley:UniversityofCaliforniaPress.

EnsembleKashmirTheatreAkademi.Available:http://ektakashmir.org/index.php[29March2013].

Fanon,F.1986.Blackskin,whitemasks.London:PlutoPress.

Fanon,F.2004.Thewretchedoftheearth.NewYork:GrovePress.

Filkins,D.&Burns,J.F.2006.Thereachofwar:military;1deepinaU.S.desert,practicingtofacetheIraqinsurgency.NewYorkTimes.

Forsyth,A.&Megson,C.2009.Getreal:DocumentaryTheatrepastandpresent.London:PalgraveMacmillan.

Foster,D.,Haupt,P.&DeBeer,M.2005.Thetheatreofviolence:narrativesofprotagonistsintheSouthAfricanconflict.Oxford:JamesCurreyLimited.

Frankenberg,R.&Mani,L.1996.Crosscurrents,crosstalk:race,‘postcoloniality’,andthepoliticsoflocation.InDisplacement,diaspora,andgeographiesofidentity.Swedenburg,Ed.Durham:DukeUniversityPress.

Frieze,J.2011.Nakedtruth:theatricalperformanceandthediagnosticturn.TheatreResearchInternational.36:148-162.

Gambaro,G.1992.Informationforforeigners:threeplays.NorthwesternUniversityPress.

Gardner,L.2009.Anxietytheatre.Available:http://www.theguardian.com/stage/theatreblog/2009/mar/02/anxiety-theatre[2015January30].

Gesser-Edelsburg,A.2011.Entertainment-education:dilemmasofIsraelicreatorsoftheatreabouttheIsraeli-Palestinianconflictinpromotingpeace.JournalofPeaceEducation.8(1):55-76.

Gesser-Edelsburg,A.2012.TheIsraeli–Palestinianconflictthroughtheatre:aqualitativestudyofIsraelihighschoolstudents.ResearchinDramaEducation:TheJournalofAppliedTheatreandPerformance.17(1):83-101.

Gill,Z.W.2009.Rehearsingthewaraway:perpetualwarriortrainingincontemporaryUSarmypolicy.TDR:TheDramaReview.53(3):139-155.

179

Ginters,L.2010.Onaudiencing:Theworkofthespectatorinliveperformance.AboutPerformance.10:7-14.

Goldman,P.etal.1983.Charliecompany:whatVietnamdidtous.NewYork:Morrow.

Gumbrecht,H.U.2006.InPraiseofAthleticBeauty.Cambridge,Massachusetts:TheBelknapPress.

Guru,G.2002.HowegalitarianarethesocialsciencesinIndia?Economic&PoliticalWeekly.27(51):5003-5008.

Haedicke,S.C.2002.Thepoliticsofparticipation:unvoyagepascommelesautressurlescheminsdel'exil.TheatreTopics.12(2):99-118.

Haider[DVD].2014.DirectedbyV.Bhardwaj.India.

Hamid,P.A.2006.Soldiersunderstress.Available:www.himalmag.com/component/content/article/1489-Soldiers-under-stress.html[2013May4].

Hare,D.1999.ViaDolorosa.InViadolorosaandwhenshallwelive,London:Faber&Faber.

Hare,D.2005.Stuffhappens:aplay.Faber&Faber.

Haseman,B.2007.IdentifyingthePerformanceResearchParadigm.InPracticeasresearch:approachestocreativeartsenquiry.E.Barrett&B.Bolt,Eds.London:I.B.Tauris&CoLtd.

Heddon,D.,Iball,H.&Zerihan,R.2012.Comecloser:confessionsofintimatespectatorsinonetooneperformance.ContemporaryTheatreReview.22(1):120-133.

HemisphericInstituteofPerformanceandPoliticsintheAmericas.2009.Available:http://hemisphericinstitute.org[2013March14].

Heredia,R.C.2009.Societyandstate.Infochange.November.

HotelRwanda[DVD].2004.DirectedbyT.George.USA.

hooks,b.1992.Blacklooks:raceandrepresentation,Boston:SouthEndPress.

Huggins,M.K.,Haritos-Fatouros,M.&Zimbardo,P.2002.Violenceworkers:policetorturersandmurderersreconstructBrazilianatrocities.Berkeley:UniversityofCaliforniaPress.

Hughes,J.2007.Theatre,performanceandthe'waronterror':ethicalandpoliticalquestionsarisingfromBritishTheatricalResponsestoWarandTerrorism.ContemporaryTheatreReview.17(2):49-164.

Hughes,J.2011.Performanceinatimeofterror:criticalmimesisandtheageofuncertainty.Manchester:ManchesterUniversityPress.

Huntington,S.P.1957.Thesoldierandthestate:thetheoryandpoliticsofcivil-militaryrelations.NewYork:VintageBooks.

IndiaTV.2010.Stone-PeltingValleyYouthsUsingFacebook,YouTubeAsWeapons.Available:http://www.indiatvnews.com/news/india/stone-pelting-valley-youths-using-facebook-youtube-as-weapons-4406.html[2014October28].

InPlaceofWar.2012.Inplaceofwar.Available:http://inplaceofwar.net[2013March14].

180

Jammu&KashmirHumanWelfareAssociation.2013.Ex-militantsdemandproperrehabilitationinJammuandKashmir.Available:http://articles.economictimes.indiatimes.com/2013-03-26/news/38040343_1_rehabilitation-policy-militants-jammu-and-kashmir[2015January12].

Janowitz,M.1960.Theprofessionalsoldier:asocialandpoliticalportrait.Glencoe:FreePress.

Kabir,A.J.2005.Nippedinthebud?Pleasuresandpoliticsinthe1960sKashmirFilms.SouthAsianPopularCulture.3(2):83-100.

Kabir,A.J.2010.TheKashmiriasMusliminBollywood's'newKashmirfilms'.ContemporarySouthAsia.18(4):373-385.

Kak,S.2010.WhatareKashmir'sstonepelterssayingtous?EconomicandPoliticalWeekly.11September.

Kak,S.2013.Childrenofthetehreek.Available:www.himalmag.com/component/content/article/264-children-of-the-tehreek.html[2014,August].

Kalmanowitz,D.2013.Ontheseam:fictionastruth--whatcanartdo?JournalofAppliedArts&Health.4(1):37-47.

Kaprow,A.1995.Excerptsfrom"Assemblages,environments&happenings".InHappeningsandOtherActs.M.R.Sandford,Ed.London&NewYork:Routledge.

Kaufman,M.2001.TheLaramieproject.NewYork:FirstVintageBooks.

Kemmu,M.L.1994.DakhYeliTsalan.

Kershaw,B.1999.Theradicalinperformance:betweenBrechtandBaudrillard.Routledge.

Kher,K.2006.Khudasemannathu[Song].

Knowles,M.S.1967.Programplanningforadultsaslearners.AdultLeadership.15:267-279.

Krueger,J.S.&Pedraza,F.I.2012.Missingvoices:warattitudesamongmilitaryservice-connectedcivilians.ArmedForces&Society.38(3):391-412.

Kummel,G.,Caforio,G.&Dandekar,C.2009.Armedforces,soldiersandcivil-militaryrelations:essaysinhonorofJurgenKuhlmann.DeutscheNationalbibliothek.

Lehmann,H.T.2006.Postdramatictheatre.Routledge.

Levi,P.1988.Thedrownedandthesaved.London:Abacus.

Levine,S.K.2013.Expectingtheunexpected:improvisationinart-basedresearch.JournalofAppliedArts&Health.4(1):21-28.

Lipovetsky,M.&Beumers,B.2008.Realityperformance:documentarytrendsinpost-SovietRussiantheatre.ContemporaryTheatreReview.18(3):293-306.

Machon,J.2013.Immersivetheatres:intimacyandimmediacyincontemporaryperformance.PalgraveMacmillan.

181

Mackey,A.2013.Troublinghumanitarianconsumption:reframingrelationalityinAfricanchildsoldiernarratives.ResearchinAfricanLiteratures.44(4):99-122.

Mackey,S.&Fisher,A.S.2011.IntroductiontoRustomBharucha'skeynotelecture:problematisingappliedtheatre:asearchforalternativeparadigms.ResearchinDramaEducation:TheJournalofAppliedTheatreandPerformance.16(3):365-384.

Magelssen,S.2009.Rehearsingthe"warriorethos":"theatreimmersion"andthesimulationoftheatresofwar.TDR:TheDramaReview.53(1):47-72.

Majumdar,A.2014.ThedjinnsofEidgah.OberonBooks.

Mamdani,M.2001.Whenvictimsbecomekillers.Princeton:PrincetonUniversityPress.

Manchanda,R.2001.Gunsandburqa:womenintheKashmiriconflict.InWomen,WarandPeaceinSouthAsia:BeyondVictimhoodtoAgency.R.Manchanda,Ed.NewDehli:Sage.

Maoz,I.2004.Coexistenceisintheeyeofthebeholder:evaluatingintergroupencounterinterventionsbetweenJewsandArabsinIsrael.JournalofSocialIssues.60:437–452.

MarketTheatre.2012.TheLine[Performance].Available:http://markettheatre.co.za/shows/watch/the-line[August2014].

Markham,A.N.2005.‘Gouglyearly’:fragmentednarrativeandbricolageasinterpretivemethod.QualitativeInquiry.11(6):813-839.

Martin,C.2006.Bodiesofevidence.TheDramaReview.50(3):8-15.

MassachusettsInstituteofTechnology.2007.Reflectivepractice:anapproachforexpandingyourlearningfrontiers.Available:http://ocw.mit.edu/courses/urban-studies-and-planning/11-965-reflective-practice-an-approach-for-expanding-your-learning-frontiers-january-iap-2007/[2013February12].

McMahon,B.2008.Ex-childsoldier’sliterarybestselleris‘factuallyflawed'.TheObserver.19January.

McNiff,K.2013.Oncreativewritingandhistoricalunderstanding.JournalofAppliedArts&Health.4(1):29-35.

Mee,E.B.2012.Theculturalintifada:PalestiniantheatreintheWestBank.TDR:TheDramaReview.56(3):167-176.

Menon,J.2013.Theperformanceofnationalism:India,Pakistan,andthememoryofpartition.Cambridge:CambridgeUniversityPress.

Milgram,S.1974.Obediencetoauthority.NewYork:Harper&Row.

Mohanty,C.1988.Underwesterneyes:feministscholarshipandcolonialdiscourses.FeministReview.30:333-358.

Moriarty,G.2004.Theweddingcommunityplayproject:across-communityproductioninNorthernIreland.TheatreandEmpowerment:CommunityDramaontheWorldStage.Cambridge:CambridgeUniversityPress.

Munshi,S.2013.Analysisofconflictwithinacontestedland:thecaseofKashmir.DefenceandPeaceEconomics.24(3):261-292.

182

Naim,C.M.1969.ConsequencesoftheIndo-PakistaniWarforUrduLanguageandLiterature:APartingofWays?JournalofAsianStudies.28(2):269–283.

Nassar,H.K.2006.Storiesfromunderoccupation:performingthePalestinianexperience.TheatreJournal.58(1):15-37.

NationalDefenceAcademy.2014.NationalDefenceAcademy.Available:http://www.nda.nic.in/[2015March].

Nelson,M.2001.Aborigineinthecitadel.TheHudsonReview.53(4):543-553.

Nicholson,H.2005Applieddrama:thegiftoftheatre.NewYork:PalgraveMacmillan.

Niranjana,T.1994.Integratingwhosenation?TouristsandterroristsinRoja.EconomicandPoliticalWeekly.29(3):79–82.

Nordstrom,C.2004.Shadowsofwar:violence,power,andinternationalprofiteeringinthetwenty-firstcentury.Berkeley:UniversityofCaliforniaPress.

Oznick,C.1999.Therightsofhistoryandtherightsofimagination.Commentary.March:22-27.

Packer,G.2008.Betrayed:Aplay.Faber&Faber.

Panksepp,J.1998.Affectiveneuroscience:thefoundationsofhumanandanimalemotions.NewYork:OxfordUniversityPress.

Parashar,S.2011.Gender,jihad,andjingoism:womenasperpetrators,planners,andpatronsofmilitancyinKashmir.StudiesinConflict&Terrorism.34:295-317.

ParisisBurning[DVD].1990.DirectedbyJ.Livingston.NewYorkCity.

Pearson,M.2010.Site-specificperformance.PalgraveMacmillan.

Petkova,V.I.&Ehrsson,H.H.2008.IfIwereyou:perceptualillusionofbodyswapping;Available:http://www.plosone.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0003832[2014October28].

Pinter,Harold.2005.Nobellecture:art,truth&politics.Available:http://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/literature/laureates/2005/pinter-lecture-e.html[2014October18].

Prigatano,G.P.&Schacter,D.L.1991.Awarenessofdeficitafterbraininjury:clinicanandtheoreticalissues.NewYork:OxfordUniversityPress.

Rahbek-Clemmensen,J.,Archer,E.M.,Barr,J.,Belkin,A.,Guerrero,M.,Hall,C.&Swain,K.E.O.2012.Conceptualizingthecivil-militarygap:aresearchnote.ArmedForces&Society.38(4):669-678.

Rancière,J.2010.Dissensus:onpoliticsandaesthetics.A&CBlack.

Rashid,T.2014.Kashmir:jawankillsfivecolleagues,himself.HindustanTimes.27February.

Ravenhill,M.2008.Shoot/GetTreasure/Repeat(ModernPlays).MethuenDrama.

Rudolph,S.H.2000.Civilsocietyandtherealmoffreedom.Economic&PoliticalWeekly.34(20):1762-1769.

183

Rugamba,D.&Gyselinx,I.2007.PeterWeiss’Theinvestigation[Performance].London:YoungVic.

Salverson,J.1996.Performingemergency:witnessing,populartheatre,andthelieoftheliteral.TheatreTopics.6(2):181-191.

Saper,B.1988.Onlearningterrorism.Terrorism.11:13-27.

SouthAsianMagazineforActionandReflection(Samar).2011.Disappearedmenandsearchingwomen:humanrightsandmourninginKashmir.Available:http://samarmagazine.org/archive/articles/364[2014September].

Samet,E.D.2002.Teachingpoetrytosoldiersinapost-geroicage.ArmedForces&Society.29:109-127.

Sarukkai,S.2007a.Dalitexperienceandtheory.EconomicandPolticalWeekly.4043-4048.

Sarukkai,S.2007b.The'Other'inanthropologyandphilosophy.EconomicandPoliticalWeekly.1406-1409.

Schaffer,K.&Smith,S.2004.Humanrightsandnarratedlives:theethicsofrecognition.NewYork,Basingstoke:PalgraveMacmillan.

Schechner,R.2014.Performancestudies:antntroduction.3rdedition:Routledge.

Schinina,G.2004.“Faraway,soclose":psychosocialandtheatreactivitieswithSerbianrefugees.TDR:TheDramaReview.48(3):32-49.

Schwandt,T.2001.DictionaryofQualitativeResearch.ThousandOakes:Sage.

Sen,A.2006.Identityandviolence:theillusionofdestiny.NewYork:W.W.Norton&Company.

Shaughnessy,N.2012.Applyingperformance:liveart,sociallyengagedtheatreandaffectivepractice.London:PalgraveMacmillan.

Shaver,A.&Zhou,Y.Y.2015.Howtomakesurveysinwarzonesbetterandwhythisisimportant.Available:http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/monkey-cage/wp/2015/01/06/how-to-make-surveys-in-war-zones-better-and-why-this-is-important/[2015January10].

Silke,A.2003.Becomingaterrorist.InTerrorists,victimsandsociety.A.Silke,Ed.Chichester,UK:Wiley.

Skloot,R.1982.ThetheatreoftheHolocaust:Volume1.Madison:TheUniversityofWisconsinPress.

Smith,A.D.1994.TwilightLosAngeles.NewYork:FirstAnchorBooks.

Smith,A.D.1998.Firesinthemirror:CrownHeights,Brooklynandotheridentities.NewYork:DramatistsPlayServiceInc.

Smith,H.&Dean,R.T.2009.Practice-ledresearch,research-ledpracticeinthecreativearts.Endinburgh:EdinburghUniversityPress.

Soans,R.2005.Talkingtoterrorists.London:OberonBooksLtd.

Sonpar,S.2008.Apotentialresource?Ex-militantsinJammuandKashmir.Intervention.6(2):147-153.

184

Srinivas,M.N.1996.IndiananthropologistsandthestudyofIndianculture.Economic&PoliticalWeekly.31(11).

Stuart-Fisher,A.2011.Trauma,authenticityandthelimitsofverbatim.PerformanceResearch:OnTrauma.16(1):112-122.

Taft-Kaufman,J.2000.Howtotellatruewarstory:thedramaturgyandstagingofnarrativetheatre.TheatreTopics.10(1):17-38.

Tantray,S.2014.InternationaldayofthedisappearedinKashmir.Available:http://www.thekashmirwalla.com/2014/08/international-day-enforced-disappearances/#.VE9DWYuUfB[2014October28].

Taussig,M.1986.Shamanism,colonialism,andthewildman:astudyinterrorandhealing.Chicago:UniversityofChicagoPress.

Taylor,D.1997.Disappearingacts:spectaclesofgenderandnationalisminArgentina's"DirtyWar".Durham:DukeUniversityPress.

Taylor,D.2003.Thearchiveandtherepertoire:performingculturalmemoryintheAmericas.Durham:DukeUniversityPress.

Taylor,D.2009.Afterword:Warplay.TheModernLanguageAssociationofAmerica.124(5):1886-1895.

Taylor,R.2007.Verbatim:DocumentaryTheatreandpolitics.London:Oberon.

Tessler,G.2007.TheassociationofJewishrefugees:servingHolocaustrefugeesandsurvivorsworldwide.Available:http://www.ajr.org.uk/index.cfm/section.journal/issue.Dec07/article=989[14October2013].

Testa,B.M.2009.Thearmy’strainingweapon:seriousgames.Workforce.

TheNationalCommissiononTerroristAttacksUpontheUnitedStates.2004.9/11CommissionReport.Available:http://www.9-11commission.gov/report/911Report.pdf[6May2015].

TheHindu.2013.Artofthestate.TheHindu.27September.

TheNewIndianExpress.2013.KashmirfilmfestmaybeshiftedtoUniversityofHyderabad.TheNewIndianExpress.9September.

Thomas,T.2010.ThegrayzoneofvictimsandperpetratorsinPeterWeiss'sTheInvestigation.ModernDrama.53(4):557-582.

Thompson,J.2003.AppliedTheatre:bewildermentandbeyond.Oxford:PeterLang.

Thompson,J.2005.Diggingupstories:AppliedTheatre,performanceandwar.Manchester:ManchesterUniversityPress.

Thompson,J.2009.Performanceaffects:AppliedTheatreandtheendofeffect.Basingstoke:PalgraveMacmillan.

Thompson,J.&Schechner,R.2004.Why"socialtheatre"?TheDramaReview.48(3):11-16.

185

Tisdale,K.2014.Beingvulnerableandbeingethicalwith/inresearch.InFoundationsofResearch:MethodsofInquiryinEducationandtheSocialSciences.K.BennettdeMarrais&S.D.Lapan.Eds.NewYork:Routledge.

Tough,A.1971.Theadult'slearningproject:afreshapproachtotheoryandpracticeinadultlearning.Toronto:OISE.

UHCCollective.2006.UHCCollectiveWorks:Manchester.Manchester:CastlefieldGallery.

Unnikrishnan,D.2011.CongealedbloodinKashmir.Available:www.himalmag.com/component/content/article/4580-congealed-blood-in-kashmir.html[2013May4].

Victoroff,J.2005.Themindoftheterrorist:areviewandcritiqueofpsychologicalapproaches.TheJournalofConflictResolution.49(1):3-42.

Wadsworth,H.L.2000.Artisticinquiryindance/movementtherapy.Springfield:C.C.Thomas.

Weiss,P.1966.Theinvestigation.DramaticPublishingCompany.

Wikipedia.2013.CrownHeightsRiot.Available:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crown_Heights_riot[2013,October2].

Wikipedia.2013.RodneyKing.Available:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rodney_King[2October2013].

Whitehead,A.n.d.Kashmir47Images.Available:http://www.andrewwhitehead.net/kashmir-47-images.html[2014March9].

Williams,R.2006.Cultureandmaterialism(radicalthinkers).Verso.

Winslow,D.1997.TheCanadianairborneregimentinSomalia:asocio-culturalinquiry.Ottawa:CanadianGovernmentPublishing.

Wolff,J.2008.Theaestheticsofuncertainty.ColumbiaUniversityPress.

Yasir,B.B.2009.TheatreKashmir.Available:http://bbyasir.blogspot.in/2009/10/fellowship-thesis-summary.html[2013October3].

Yasir,B.B.&theEnsembleKashmirTheatreAkademi.2013.Trunouve[Performance]Srinagar:BadamibaghCantonment.

Yasir,B.B.&theEnsembleKashmirTheatreAkademi.2014.CountryWithoutaPostOffice[Performance].Pune:UWCMahindraCollege.

Young,S.2009.PlayingwithDocumentaryTheatre:Aalstandtakingcareofbaby.NewTheatreQuarterly.25(1):72-87.

Zizek,S.2002.APleaforLeninstIntolerance.CriticalInquiry.28(2):542-566.