But to me, Yudhisthir was the prototype of tragic hero and he went totally unnoticed by the audience because the author was not focusing on him alone, he was focusing on the broader picture. People address Oedipus, Orestes as the classical Greek Tragic heroes who later set the bar for Shakespeare for him to pen iconic tragic heroes like Macbeth, King Lear (he kind of reminds me of Dhritrasthra) or Hamlet. To me, he was the first archetype of tragic hero. Why? I have already spoken, Yudhisthir was more than just a character. Yudhisthir, to me, never fits in his own narrative and this was, I think, by design. The Kali is the one where good ones are unable to control the evil and stay silent while the evil ones florish good and bad becomes gray, layered while social hierarchy topples: Aswathama, Vidur, Karna are such characters. The Dwapar Yuga is when corruption intruded within humans and they became equally strong and valiant as the good ones: Krishna, Shakuni, Dronacharya, Draupadi were such characters. Treta Yuga is when corruption existed only within monstrous beings, humans were good, valient and bereft of any corruptions: this is represented in the Characterization of Bhisma, Lord Parshu Ram, Pandu. Satya was considered the eternal age, where any living beings were bereft of corruptions: the Gods, Demi-gods, Goddess Ganga, Ved Vyas, all these characters are the flagbearers of Satya Yuga. Mahabharat clearly reflects the Four Eternal Ages of Hinduism: Satya (The golden utopian age), Treta (The Age of Ram), Dwapar (the age when Mahabharat Takes place) and Kali (the current and the most corrupt age).
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |