Review: A Walk In The Woods [Motley]
The name of Motley tagged with a play primes us to expect an experience above the ordinary. So it was with A Walk In The Woods, an adaptation of a 1988 play by Lee Blessing. The original is about two arms negotiators, one Russian and one American, who develop a friendship of sorts during a year of peace talks in Switzerland. Motley’s version makes it about two diplomats, one Pakistani and one Indian, in the same spot – both geographically and figuratively.
The personalities of the two protagonists is a study in contrast. The Pakistani diplomat Jamal (played by Naseeruddin Shah) is flippant and flamboyant. He is a glib talker, switches effortlessly between Urdu-Punjabi and English, frequently drifts into off-topic asides. The Indian counterpart Ram Chinappa (played by Rajit Kapur) is staid, guarded and would rather not waste his time and his nation’s money discussing non-essentials with the Pakistani diplomat. He speaks warily in measured monosyllables, keeps his hands and legs crossed, does not once crack a smile. "We are not friends" is his curt rejoinder to the Pakistani diplomat’s attempts at building a bond.
Jamal is the more experienced of the two, and the one to lead and steer the conversations. We learn gradually that Jamal’s surface casualness masks an inner cynicism, and that Ram Chinappa is not the hard nut he makes himself out to be. Inspite of himself, and without quite meaning to, Ram warms up to Jamal over the course of the play. He does not go so far as to invite a pet name for himself (Jamal had tentatively offered to "Ramu" him at the outset, a suggestion that Ram had promptly declined), but by the time the play closes, Ram can no longer earnestly claim an absence of friendship.
This change comes about over a series of meetings that take place between the two in the woods in Geneva. Seasons shift as time passes – we sense the rains and chill in the actors’ clothes and body language. The audience never sees the men at the negotiating table: for us they are always in the woods, away from the prying eyes of the reporters whom they keep planning to hoodwink, like schoolboys one-upping their hostel warden. Their relationship progresses from stonewalling of overtures, to sharing gajak from Delhi and debating on the merits (or not) of the topic of brown suits, to a near-tussi na jao goodbye.
This isn’t the play for you if you are looking for a What-Happens-Next-Will-Blow-Your-Mind. A Walk In The Woods is largely undramatic and uneventful. There are big things at stake, but they remain in the shadows. There is humour, but not the laugh out loud kind. The setup can only work with actors who are masters at the game. Motley’s performance gets that pitch-perfect. Each inflection of voice, movement of limb, makes the two characters come alive and keeps us invested in the proceedings on stage.
Throughout the play, the point of contention is a proposal being negotiated between India and Pakistan. We hear impassioned avowals of clause number so-and-so in the proposal, of checks and safeguards, words being redlined or subtly tweaked – but we never learn WHAT the proposal is. This play isn’t going anywhere near fleshed-out discourse on Indo-Pak conflict: A Walk In The Woods keeps its focus on the human connection between these two men, what’s happening between their nations remains firmly fuzzy. In fact, when the characters do get into political musings, the passages come across as simplistic – it’s just as well the play did not delve deeper there.
I went back and read Lee Blessing’s original after watching the performance, and it was fun to play spot-the-difference. The Russian negotiator is the Pakistani diplomat here, and the line about "No one speaks technical Russian. It is like saying I speak Algebra" works well when the language referred to is Urdu instead. Some of the best dialogues – the delicious quotable "Formality is simply anger with its hair combed" – are straight from the source. Pop culture references like Mickey Mouse and cowboys have been swapped with Bollywood and the like. Willie Nelson becomes Hemant Kumar!
The connotation may have been unintended, but I did marvel at the choice of parting gift: a tie, which is also a no-win situation. Not just any tie, but an orange one – the color that lies between Go and Stop.
1. Kishore
Well narrated! Liked the nuances of spot and tie. Tussi na jao reminded me of one of my favourite songs, Aaj Jaane Ki Zid Na Karo originally sung by Habib Wali Muhammad, a Pakistani singer and later popularised by many including Farida Khanum and Tanya Wells.
https://youtu.be/TLmNelznGig
July 8th, 2018 5:54 pm
2. Shuchi
Thanks Kishore! We missed your company at the play this time.
I had to stop myself from writing of the correlation in the prim negotiator’s names across the source and the adaptation – too much reading between the lines even for me 😛 But between cryptic-inclined folks, it is probably OK to say: “John Honeyman” and “Ram Chinappa” both fit the mould of “[Common Old-Fashioned First Name] [Sweetener Exclamatory Word]”.
Aaj Jaane Ki Zid Na Karo – beautiful!
July 8th, 2018 8:40 pm
3. Kishore
Sorry I couldn’t make it. Cherish your company, as always. Hope to see you and the play soon.
Ram may be a nod to Rameshwar Nath Kao, the first Director of R&AW
July 9th, 2018 8:44 am
4. Rachna Priyanka
Beautifully reviewed.
It’s clear that the actors perfected the subtleties of the plot. In any event, with actors like Naseeruddin Shah and Rajit Kapur, one would expect that. I loved how you compared and contrasted the play with the original – especially, the bit about the whimsical and arbitrary Urdu. And, certainly, I could have never understood the significance of an orange tie!
I hope I could have seen this play.
July 9th, 2018 1:53 pm
5. Shuchi
@Kishore: Rameshwar Nath Kao – You may be on to something there…
@Rachna Priyanka: Glad you liked the review. The secondary meaning of orange tie was probably unintended and it’s just me seeing random patterns 😀
July 9th, 2018 7:51 pm