This article was downloaded by: [York University Libraries]On: 19 November 2014, At: 09:15Publisher: RoutledgeInforma Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954Registered office: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH,UK

Research in Drama Education:The Journal of Applied Theatreand PerformancePublication details, including instructions for authorsand subscription information:http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/crde20

Wishing for a World without'Theatre for Development':Demystifying the case ofBangladeshSyed Jamil AhmedPublished online: 18 Aug 2010.

To cite this article: Syed Jamil Ahmed (2002) Wishing for a World without 'Theatrefor Development': Demystifying the case of Bangladesh, Research in DramaEducation: The Journal of Applied Theatre and Performance, 7:2, 207-219, DOI:10.1080/1356978022000007983

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/1356978022000007983

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all theinformation (the “Content”) contained in the publications on our platform.However, Taylor & Francis, our agents, and our licensors make norepresentations or warranties whatsoever as to the accuracy, completeness, orsuitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinions and views expressedin this publication are the opinions and views of the authors, and are not theviews of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Content shouldnot be relied upon and should be independently verified with primary sourcesof information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any losses, actions,claims, proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilitieswhatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connectionwith, in relation to or arising out of the use of the Content.

This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes.Any substantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-

licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expresslyforbidden. Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Yor

k U

nive

rsity

Lib

rari

es]

at 0

9:15

19

Nov

embe

r 20

14

Research in Drama Education, Vol. 7, No. 2, 2002

Wishing for a World without ‘Theatre forDevelopment’: demystifying the case ofBangladeshSYED JAMIL AHMEDDepartment of Theatre and Music, Faculty of Arts Building, University of Dhaka,Dhaka 1000, Bangladesh (e-mail: arnab@agni.com)

ABSTRACT The author argues that Theatre for Development in Bangladesh practised byNon-Governmental Organisations, which is almost entirely funded by internationaldonor organisations, serves globalisation in the name of poverty alleviation. By examin-ing the case of two NGOs, Proshika and Bangladesh Institute of Theatre Arts, he showsthat the NGOs are caught in the contradiction of either empire building for self-sustenance or serving as pseudo-mercenaries for survival. Through subtle manipulation,the interests of multi-national capital determine the donor’s agendas, which in turndetermine the issues taken up by the NGOs in their plays—all in the name of the people.An optimistic alternative offered by Aranyak, a group of non-professional theatreactivists which made signi� cant progress in the rural areas during the 1980s, has failedbecause of its complete dependence on urban middle-class leadership. The authorconcludes by advocating for the necessity of exploring alternatives by which indigenoustheatre performers may access directly the intellectual fermentation of the North witha decolonised mind and create performances which allow debate, re� exivity and the� ight to in� nity.

In a recent series of seminar classes that I offered to a group of MA students studyingTheatre for Development, I began by making a simple, but loaded, declaration: I wishthere could be a world without Theatre for Development. Unfortunately, we did nothave enough time to explore the subterfuges that this statement offers. I wish to beginby offering the same statement, hoping, this time, that there will be enough interest andtime to explore it. Before proceeding further, I think I should add also that at a time nottoo distant, when I was looking for a relevant form of theatre for a bottom-of-the-lad-der country like Bangladesh, Theatre for Development (TfD), Freire and Boal, alongwith the case of Kamiriithu, excited me with a wonderful freshness that can only becompared with falling in love for the � rst time. I was trained as a theatre director at anelite South Asian drama school, had opportunities of studying and teaching in Europeand North America and yet a dose of Thiong’o and Freire was exceptionally relevantfor my context—Bangladesh. I have been a practitioner of TfD, have taught courses on

ISSN 1356-9783 print; 1470-112X online/02/020207–13 Ó 2002 Taylor & Francis LtdDOI: 10.1080/1356978022000007983

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Yor

k U

nive

rsity

Lib

rari

es]

at 0

9:15

19

Nov

embe

r 20

14

208 S. J. Ahmed

it in Bangladesh, where I saw my students lighting up with the same charge that I feltearlier. However, having seen and said all that, I now wish we could have a worldwithout Theatre for Development.

1. The Context: Third World and development

Now let me begin with the word ‘world’. A student of mine, at a seminar, asked avisiting professor from the UK if there was TfD in his country. He paused brie� y andsaid, ‘I’m afraid, no. But we have, or rather, we call it Community Theatre’. Hence, the‘world’ of TfD is the ‘Third World’, more respectfully clothed as the ‘South’. I am sureit will suf� ce to point out that my wish, translated in the above context, simply is ‘I wishthe Third World could do without Theatre for Development’.

‘Development’, a � eld monopolised by economists, has turned out to be a virtualjungle of labyrinths. However, in order to contextualise my argument, I will remindmyself of Anisur Rahman’s evaluation of ‘development’ undertaken in the last half-a-century, during which period the magic word promised a blood-less and revolution-freeprosperity to the ‘developing’ nations. However, at the end of the day, not only has‘development’ failed to make any ‘signi� cant dent on the material condition of thepeople’, but in the process, the people also have been ‘alienate[d] from their indigenoussearch for life’, ‘while economic and social inequalities have skyrocketed’ (Rahman,2000). In countries like Bangladesh, the protagonists of ‘development’ have beenconcerned with issues such as ‘poverty alleviation’, which ignores human qualities, andin a minimalistic and static sense seeks to ‘barely maintain […] the productivity oflabour of the ordinary people’ to be fed and sheltered like ‘livestock’ (Rahman, 2000).The importance of such concern for ‘poverty alleviation’ ties well with globalisation inwhich ‘client nation-states are being purchased with so-called “development-assistance”con� ned now more to development of infrastructure to facilitate private entrepreneur-ship, with the condition that they open up their capital and labour markets tointernational capital to exploit cheap labour’ (Rahman, 2000). Let us not forget, asChomsky reminds us, that ‘Imperialist countries want a free market for the under-developed nations and protectionism for themselves’ (Boal, 1998, p. 254). What isimportant in a globalised ‘village’ is that the ‘livestock’ should have a little surplusmoney after survival, so as to transform themselves into a lucrative market like Indiaand China—where Coca-Cola and McDonald’s burgers reap a rich harvest. After all, asBoal quotes US Senator Barry Goldwater, ‘poverty is necessary to capitalism’ (p. 41).

2. NGOs in Bangladesh

The above context is important, not only for being reminded of the global perspective,but also because most of the Theatre for Development in Bangladesh is currently beingimplemented by non-governmental organisations, or in common parlance the NGOs, aterm used by the World Bank to refer to ‘any group or institution that is independentfrom government, and that has humanitarian or co-operative, rather than commercialobjectives’ (Ahmad, 2001). It is important to remember that these organisations ‘havenot originated from Grass Roots Organisation in civil society. Rather, it is NGO

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Yor

k U

nive

rsity

Lib

rari

es]

at 0

9:15

19

Nov

embe

r 20

14

A World without ‘Theatre for Development’ 209

workers who set up groups, which clients then join to get micro-credit and otherservices’ (Ahmad, 2001). Most of these organisations are completely, and a few partly,dependent on foreign funds. The context is doubly important when one is reminded that‘Bangladesh has the largest and most vibrant Non Governmental Organisation sector inthe world’ (Dutta, 1999) and that these NGOs ‘have emerged as an integral part of theinstitutional structure for addressing poverty as well as rural development, genderequality, environmental conservation, disaster management, human rights and othersocial issues’ (Embassy, 2002). There are 1,937 of them registered with the NGO AffairsBureau [1], each with numerous branches operating in a country, about 60% the size ofEngland (147,570 sq km), into which 130 million people are crammed. Currently, 80%of the villages in Bangladesh are covered by NGOs [2]. One of their prime objectives ispoverty alleviation, the principal instruments for which are micro-credit, skill develop-ment and employment generation. Other activities include formal and non-formaleducation, health, family planning, agriculture, water supply, sanitation, human rightsadvocacy, legal aid, etc. The combined network and organisational strength of theNGOs hugely surpasses that of the government or political parties. The budgets of thethree largest NGOs currently in Bangladesh may give some idea of their size andstrength: Bangladesh Rural Advancement Committee (BRAC) about US$400 million;Proshika (an acronym of three words in Bangla denoting training, education and action)about US$240 million; and Association for Social Advancement (ASA) about US$200million. (The New Nation, 2002) [3].

3. Theatre for Development of the NGOs

Theatre for Development, that is all forms of theatre that seek to engage in questionsrelated to ‘development’, was introduced in Bangladesh in 1978 by Proshika, after itsChairman, Kazi Faruque Ahmed met Ross Kidd in Canada. They called it PopularTheatre. Today, 14 NGOs are directly engaged in TfD, while a similar number employit in training and related activities. As Bokul (2001, p. 201) sums up, their work can bebroadly seen to serve as:

1. a medium for transmitting development messages;2. a process of development;3. a ‘tool’ for development;4. a ‘tool’ for training.

Leaving aside the last two variants of TfD, where it is used in dealing with issues suchas ‘educating’ the voters, exerting pressure on local government for change etc. (3), andin training (specially through role-playing) as adopted by a few NGOs and freelancetrainers (4), let us examine the � rst two, for they will suf� ce to highlight the essentialcharacteristics of TfD as used by the NGOs in Bangladesh.

3.1. Proshika

Proshika is a good example of those NGOs which use TfD as a medium for transmitting

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Yor

k U

nive

rsity

Lib

rari

es]

at 0

9:15

19

Nov

embe

r 20

14

210 S. J. Ahmed

development messages. Ostensibly, the organisation’s vision of development puts humandevelopment at the centre.

This process is founded upon the understanding that poverty reduction andpromotion of sustainable development is dependent upon the human andmaterial capacity building of the poor and their socio-economic and culturalempowerment through a process of generating human, social, economic andcultural capital. (Proshika, 2002)

Proshika organises village level ‘primary groups’ which undertake developmentprojects such as employment and income generation, education, environment protectionand housing. Its commitment to human capacity building and cultural empowerment isre� ected in its People’s Cultural Programme, which uses ‘indigenous cultural forms asan effective motivational tool for raising people’s awareness against various socialinjustice as well as asserting their rights’. Under the programme, Proshika organisesPeople’s Cultural Troupes at ‘union’ (cluster of villages) level, comprised of members ofthe primary groups who have previous experience as: (a) performers in indigenoustheatre; (b) musicians; or (c) organisers of cultural events. The People’s CulturalTroupes render songs and also perform plays at least once a month and on commemo-rative national and international days, in village fairs and in regional festivals ofPeople’s Cultural Troupes. According to a report prepared in 2000, there were 640 suchtroupes which gave a total of 12,656 performances during 1999–2000 (Proshika, 2000a).Proshika provides these troupes with musical instruments, curtains (to serve as back-drop and if necessary, to mask two sides of the stage or serve as � oor mat) and awning(to be hung over the stage). Performers are paid Taka 50–100 [4] for each performance.Money is also provided for microphones, gas-pressure lanterns and make-up. Perfor-mances are usually given on � at ground with spectators on three sides. Sometimes araised platform or even a proscenium stage is also used (Bokul, 2001, pp. 91–93). Thefollowing is its Popular Theatre process.

Play-making Phase (3–5 days).

1. The issue is selected by village or union co-ordination committee or by the culturaltroupe.

2. The troupe members create a story based on local real-life incidents, assisted byProshika � eld-workers. Simultaneously, the members carry out research on the issueas re� ected in local incidents. The theme is identi� ed.

3. The story is orally structured as a scenario divided in scenes (at least � ve scenes, ofabout 25 minutes duration).

4. The troupe members engage in improvisations based on the scenario. Simul-taneously, the development-worker engages the members in analysis of the charactersand their relationship with the power structure.

5. The development-worker helps determine props, costume, make-up, entries and exitsand guides the troupe members in the use of performance space.

6. The troupe holds run-throughs and detailed discussion on the play.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Yor

k U

nive

rsity

Lib

rari

es]

at 0

9:15

19

Nov

embe

r 20

14

A World without ‘Theatre for Development’ 211

Performance and Post-performance Phase.

1. The troupe begins with rendition of songs, followed by the play.2. At the end of the performance of the play, the performers and the develop-

ment-worker discuss with the spectators to see how much of the message wascommunicated.

3. A report of the performance is sent to the union co-ordination committee.4. The union co-ordination committee and Proshika union co-ordinator decide the next

step of action (Bokul, 2001, pp. 87–90).

Issues commonly dealt with in these plays are social injustice, dowry, polygamy,fatwa, arbitrary divorce, gender discrimination, illiteracy, unjust possession of publicresources by the power cliques, superstitious health practices, degradation of theenvironment and its consequences, and the positive impact of various developmentactions on the lives of the people (Proshika, 2000b). These issues supposedly come fromthe people themselves. However, as the process of play-making shows, the issues areselected by the village co-ordination committee, the union co-ordination committee orthe troupe and each play projects a clear top-down message. Hence, there is little roomfor Freirean ‘dialogue’ with the spectators or for the performance to act as a Boalian‘forum’. Setting aside such observation, for one may justi� ably argue in favour ofmessage-oriented developmental play, one is still left with an uneasy perception, and itis not a mere coincidence that all these issues can be grouped under sectors which attractforeign donation: good governance, women’s empowerment, safeguarding the environ-ment, primary health care, universal adult and primary education. At a closer examin-ation of the operation of the troupes one notes the involvement of the Proshikadevelopment-worker, who is directly involved with the play-making process of eachtroupe, and the training co-ordinator, whose responsibility is to organise trainingworkshops and monitor the activities at the local level. As formulated in Proshika’sguidelines for People’s Cultural Programmes, both the development-worker and thetraining co-ordinator are required to play an active role in the meetings of the villageor union co-ordination committees and the cultural troupes (the � rst step of theplay-making process) where the issue is decided (Bokul, 2001, p. 90). What happens atthe � eld level is subtle manipulation by these two functionaries. They too have to ‘dotheir job’!

Proshika claims that the plays devised by the People’s Cultural Troupes ‘create anunprecedented level of awareness’ which do more than merely stir up ‘people’s criticalconsciousness concerning social and economic reality leading to moral development,unity and action’. Its internal monitoring team has identi� ed the following reasons forthe supposed success: (a) poor people can identify themselves with the stories drawnfrom their lives; (b) the plays are in local dialect and are easily communicable; (c) theperformers are drawn from amongst them and the performance is given in a familiarenvironment (Proshika, 2000b). One cannot help pointing out that if these be reasonsfor success, then an imaginary Bollywood � lm made from stories of their life, in whichthe stars are local talents speaking local dialect, can score success a hundred times over.Surely, none of the reasons cited above re� ect Proshika’s claim that the plays ‘create anunprecedented level of awareness’ and stir up ‘people’s critical consciousness’!

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Yor

k U

nive

rsity

Lib

rari

es]

at 0

9:15

19

Nov

embe

r 20

14

212 S. J. Ahmed

Although not wishing to undermine the value of some of the plays and genuinecommitment of some of the performers, it is also important to stress that these plays arein effect a simpli� ed version of pseudo-Marxist ‘agit-prop’ plays built on con� ictbetween good (the ‘downtrodden people’) and evil (the village elite), projecting a clearmessage of what needs to be done. There is no in-depth analysis of the complexities oflife, because, as the development workers often explain, ‘the villagers will not under-stand it’, which covers well the possibility that the development worker himself may notbe clear about the complexities, or � nds it too dif� cult, or is just ‘doing his job’ whichincludes meeting a target number of performances. How do you measure the success ofa cultural programme? Economics has taught us to trust in numbers. And so, animportant duty of all Proshika employees working in the People’s Cultural Programmeis to concentrate on ful� lling (and better still, exceeding) the required quota ofperformances and creation of new troupes. Not devaluing the heart-wrung ‘truth’ ofsome of the performances, at the end of the day, the performers may be counting theirmoney more than recounting his/her experience of ‘create[ing] an unprecedented levelof awareness’ and stir[ring] up ‘people’s critical consciousness concerning social andeconomic reality’.

3.2. Bangladesh Institute of Theatre Arts

Although most of the NGOs follow the TfD process described above, there are a fewwhich seek to engage in theatre which purports to be a process of development. Thecase of Bangladesh Institute of Theatre Arts (BITA) is a good example. Established in1994, the organisation operates exclusively in the south-eastern part of Bangladesh.BITA’s main approach to development, which it calls the ‘Alternative DevelopmentApproach’, is through cultural activities that enhance the consciousness of the peopleabout their legal and human rights. Beside cultural activities, it also organises training-related activities leading to mobilising the local elite and lobbying the government, andthe material development of the people. Through all these activities, BITA seeks toprovide service to the people in terms of consciousness raising, information dissemi-nation, advocacy and mobilisation. Its programmes are: (i) Grass-root Theatre; (ii)Women’s Programme; (iii) Proscenium Theatre (for urban theatre practitioners); (iv)Students’ Programme; (v) Training; and (vi) Research and Documentation. As anorganisation for ‘alternate thinking’ BITA sees itself committed especially to women andchildren’s issues (including traf� cking and sexual exploitation), environmental problemsand poverty alleviation. It is estimated that 600–1,000 people at the grass-roots level,urban as well as rural, are directly involved with BITA’s cultural programmes (Zaki,2002). Given below is the TfD model BITA follows.

1. Area selection 8. Sequence making2. Eye survey 9. Character building3. Identify community 10. Dialogue building4. Group formation 11. Rehearsal5. Orientation about activity 12. Props making6. Information collection 13. Rehearsal with props7. Story making 14. Pre-test show

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Yor

k U

nive

rsity

Lib

rari

es]

at 0

9:15

19

Nov

embe

r 20

14

A World without ‘Theatre for Development’ 213

15. Re-rehearsal (polishing) 18. Report16. Inaugural show 19. Regular show and monitoring17. Opinion sharing with audience 20. Necessary step (Bokul, 2001, pp. 169–170)

Having selected an area and identi� ed a community that matches its vision, missionand goal, BITA organises groups of 12–15 members (usually of the same profession)who, it feels, possess the basic qualities of performers. The top-level executives select theissues after discussion with the � eld-level development workers. BITA believes thatmajor socio-economic issues, their characteristics and causes are the same all overBangladesh and there is no need to go to the community repeatedly for identi� cation ofthese. The issues which are most often featured in BITA’s plays are the oppression ofwomen, the environment, health care, children’s rights, equality of men and women andpoverty alleviation. Once the issue is selected, the identi� cation of local stories or eventsrelated to the issue, the structure of the plot and the message are determined afterconsultation with the community. However, the manner in which the selected issue isanalysed deserves special attention. The development worker uses two sets of standardcharts when analysing the issue with the group members. The � rst of these identi� es thetrend of the issue being analysed while the second, the basic reasons which give rise tothe issue and its consequences (Bokul, 2001, pp. 168–169). Hence, there is no scope forFreirean ‘dialogue’. However, BITA justi� es its process by pointing out that the chartsleave no room for confusion. Who knows, one wonders, what will happen if themessage of the Book is not followed ‘accurately’ and people begin to make their owninterpretations!

Once the issue has been analysed, the group collects information related to the issueand creates a story. The story of the play titled Bioscope may serve as an example.

A village girl likes a boatman who comes to the city every day with passengersin his boat. One day he brings the girl to the city to visit. There she observedthat the city life is being disturbed by lot of problems. People are not awareabout health issues, there prevails environmental problems, traf� cking, socialinstability. The production also highlights birth registration, women’s edu-cation issues etc.. Then the girl discovers that the village life is more peacefulthan city life. And she feels like returning to her village. (BITA: Personalcommunication)

As Bokul reminds us, the steps from story making to dialogue building involve quitea heavy input from the BITA development worker. The dialogues are developed andeven memorised before the group makes use of improvisations, in a manner whichre� ects many main-stream practitioners’ emphasis on play texts, although BITA’s ‘texts’are orally composed. The step identi� ed as ‘rehearsal’ involves 12–15 days (when thegroups create their plays for the � rst time) or 7 days (in their subsequent ventures), forabout 2 hours each day. Apart from improvisations leading to ‘blocked’ scenes, the� eld-worker determines the topics that are to be discussed with the spectators at the endof the performance, which in turn are dictated by BITA guidelines. The performers arepaid (Taka 80) for this phase of their work. The plays are performed in market places,school compounds or even courtyards of rural homesteads. The performance space is

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Yor

k U

nive

rsity

Lib

rari

es]

at 0

9:15

19

Nov

embe

r 20

14

214 S. J. Ahmed

usually non-elevated, with spectators sitting on three sides with a curtain hung on thefourth side. BITA bears the entire cost of these performances and performers are paidan allowance of Taka 130 for each performance. The main objective of the ‘opinionsharing with the audience’ is to see how effectively, if at all, the message has beencommunicated. Through subsequent performances, BITA monitors the effectiveness ofeach performance and determines the next step of action it thinks necessary to achieveits development mission (Bokul, 2001, pp. 171–174).

Performers in these plays often take immense pride in their work. They say, ‘I am arickshaw driver and an actor in BITA’s plays’ or ‘I am a � sherman and an actor inBITA’s plays’. There is a subtle irony though, which perhaps brings home the truth ofthese plays: they are BITA’s, not theirs. As already pointed out, not only is the BITA� eld-worker heavily involved in creating these plays (quite like a director in a mainstream theatre), but also the determination of the issues, their analysis and thepost-production ‘opinion sharing’ are guided by the ‘Book’.

3.3. Critique

These observations are not meant to depict the development-workers or the manage-ment of the NGOs as villains, or undermine their ideological commitment. Some of the� eld-workers are conscientious and committed to the vision, mission and goal of theirrespective NGOs. As Ahmad (2001) sums up succinctly, the NGOs play a pivotal rolein Bangladesh where the state does not reach the poor and meet their needs. Neverthe-less, when stock is taken, they have brought little change in levels of poverty despitetheir large number. As far as TfD is concerned, they have co-opted Freirean methodol-ogy by identifying the central problem not as oppression but as poverty, by converting‘dialogue’ into ‘opinion sharing’, which is a neutral technique devoid of ‘politics’. Eventhe selection and analysis of the issues do not depend on the people. All of these areforms of top-down information dissemination directed at adjusting to the existing socialstructure instead of transforming it, of ‘domestication’, instead of liberation [5]. Thisprocess may or may not be intentional, for the NGOs themselves are caught up in a netof contradictions.

In search of self-dependence, the larger NGOs are emerging as a new nexus in theexisting power structure and are building up their own empires. BRAC is runningsuccessful businesses with a cold storage company, a press, a marketing organisationnamed Arong, a real estate company, a restaurant and a commercial bank for micro-lending. Proshika has developed a transportation company, a press, a garment industryand an Internet and software company. Hence, they are already on the periphery of theconcept of NGOs as establishments with ‘humanitarian or co-operative, rather thancommercial objectives’. Herein is the contradiction.

The case is slightly different for the ‘smaller’ NGOs. As Dutta (1999) points out,‘when the INGOs deal with [the] powerful NGOs, they are generous and respectful.However, the same donor dictates the terms of partnership with small organisations’. Inorder to sustain their development activities, the smaller NGOs � nd themselves servingas pseudo-mercenaries. I have no problem with mercenaries, for they can either be theIslamic militants serving the Taliban or US marines bombing Vietnam: it all depends on

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Yor

k U

nive

rsity

Lib

rari

es]

at 0

9:15

19

Nov

embe

r 20

14

A World without ‘Theatre for Development’ 215

which cause you believe in. However, the case of the ‘smaller’ NGOs incorporatesanother contradiction. If one can, like Galileo as Brecht shows so aptly in The Life ofGalileo, squeeze a few extra pieces of gold from the senators of Venice to gaze at thestars and prove that Copernicus was right, then I can only salute his/her ingenuity andskill. Nevertheless, the Galileo paradigm also incorporates a problem: just as Medicisdumped him when the Pope threatened with the Holy Inquisitor’s inquisitive queries,the donors too may dump the NGOs when the going gets rough. Very much like the‘gamble’ with the Medicis’ patronage ended with Galileo’s recantation, when a uniqueopportunity for science to serve the ‘common man’ was lost, surrendering to the donors’agendas may well mean further entrenchment in poverty, unless the Galileo in ourcontext, the NGOs, can come up with another Discorsi. Unfortunately, none of theNGOs appear to be anywhere near a new Discorsi. Going back to Anisur Rahman, onecan point out that not only have the development initiatives failed to a large extent,‘poverty alleviation’ is a manipulation which seeks to maintain the people as ‘livestock’in order to facilitate international capital to exploit cheap labour. As far as theNGO-sponsored TfD in Bangladesh is concerned, all of them without exception dependon aid from international development agencies for sustaining their work. At the � eldlevel, the NGOs, not the people, determine the issues. Through subtle manipulation,ostensibly with altruistic motives, the issues are handled in the name of the people. Inturn, the issues of the NGOs are determined by the donors’ agenda, where the ‘larger’have some bargaining power but the ‘smaller’ have none. Hence, at the end of the day,whatever their vision, mission or goal, they are geared to ful� lling the donors’ agendas.At the ‘globalised’ level, the donors’ agendas are determined by the interest of multi-national capital. Thus, ‘development’ has emerged as a self-perpetuating industryserving the needs of globalisation, which is only imperialism in a ‘civilised’ guise.Underneath all subterfuges of ‘development’ and Theatre for Development, if one listenscarefully, the haunting question it asks is ‘development for whom’?

4. Theatre for Development by Theatre Activists

An optimistic alternative was offered by a theatre group named Aranyak in the early1980s when it built up a movement called Mukta Natak, which was a network ofmarginalised farmers’ theatre groups. The movement was initiated by urban theatreactivists based in Dhaka who visited rural communities for a period of about 15 days.Through workshops with marginalised farmers, they created plays following the modeldescribed below.

1. Establishing a base in the village 5. Improvising, analysing, making changes2. Winning the landless’ con� dence 6. Community performance3. Listening to the landless’ problems 7. Post-performance discussion4. Problem analysis and scenario making 8. Follow-up and evaluation

(Kidd & Rashid, 1984, p. 40)

All the plays created through the above process were based on real-life stories ofthe marginalised farmers. Most of the stories were about money-lending—‘how the

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Yor

k U

nive

rsity

Lib

rari

es]

at 0

9:15

19

Nov

embe

r 20

14

216 S. J. Ahmed

moneylender give money, takes back an exorbitant interest, and eventually grabs thedebtor’s land’ (Kidd & Rashid, 1984, p. 42).

The Aranyak model had a number of interesting aspects. It was entirely funded by thegroup members’ personal resources and hence it was not dependent on agendas of afunding body. Steps 4 and 5, in particular, involved a dialogic encounter of the Aranyakanimateurs and the marginalised peasants. Most of these animateurs were heavilyleaning towards Marxism and hence most of their plays projected the familiar andover-worked, watered-down Marxist version of class struggle. Consequently, the playswere structured on a clearly delineated con� ict between the oppressed peasants (all pureand white) against the oppressor village elite (all impure and black). Nevertheless, themovement created huge interest and at one time there were nearly 200 groups in theMukta Natak network. In a few cases, the workshops leading to a performance resultedin immediate action. As Kidd and Rashid (1984, p. 45) report,

One workshop was held in a � shing community whose livelihood had beendestroyed by the damming of a river further upstream. The � shermen decidedto make their play about the land created by the silting of the river. The landhad been grabbed by the larger landowners in the area, even though there isa policy in Bangladesh that this kind of land should be given to the � shermen.The play inspired the � shermen to get organized and occupy the land. Therewas a lot of resistance from the landlords but in the end the � shermenprevailed and some of the large landowners had to leave the area.

Unfortunately, the movement collapsed by the mid-1990s after signi� cant success—precisely because it was heavily dependent upon middle-class urban animateurs, whofound out that ideological commitment does not materialise middle-class materialisticdreams in the southern half of the globalised world. As Aranyak animateurs found lessand less time for Mukta Natak, almost all the groups disintegrated, in many casesco-opted by the NGOs and government agencies to produce ‘developmental’ plays onpit latrines and family planning. There was a lucrative incentive: the performers werepaid.

Thus, nearly two decades after Ross Kidd and Martin Byram demysti� ed pseudo-Freirean techniques in their analysis of Laedza Batanani [6], and nearly a quarter of acentury after it was introduced in Bangladesh, one is confronted with a not-too-unfamiliar re-enactment of co-option. However, unlike Laedza Batanani, the co-optionin Bangladesh is on a much larger scale. On the one hand, the rhetoric of developmentin the NGOs is at odds with their practice; on the other, grass-root level organisationshave failed because of their dependence on ‘conscientious’ urban middle-class leader-ship.

5. Examples from the Indigenous Theatre of Bangladesh

When one examines the history of indigenous theatre in Bangladesh, one � nds quite afew exciting examples where cultural performances became ‘active agencies of change,representing the eye by which culture sees itself and the drawing board on whichcreative actors sketch out what they believe to be more apt or interesting “designs for

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Yor

k U

nive

rsity

Lib

rari

es]

at 0

9:15

19

Nov

embe

r 20

14

A World without ‘Theatre for Development’ 217

living” ’ (Turner, 1987, p. 24). Consider, for example, the case of the Bhakti movementinitiated by Chaitanya in early sixteenth century Bengal, where he led processions of hisfollowers singing praise of Krishna. The ‘design of living’ projected in these processionsnot only built resistance against Islamisation, but also built harmony among all casteHindus and made divinity accessible to all. [For details, see Ahmed (2000, pp. 24–25).]Another example is Swadeshi Jatra, through which Mukunda Dasa, in the earlytwentieth century, was successful in creating vibrant political consciousness against theBritish colonisers. One can also cite the example of Kavi Gan, which shadows Turner’s‘judicial process’, but the dialectic between the prosecutor and defendant is transformedinto two groups of performers debating issues such as Hinduism and Islam, Man andWoman, and even Philosophy and Science. [For details, again see Ahmed (2000,pp. 316–318).] These, and many other performances serve as ‘plural re� exivity’, ‘inwhich a sociocultural group, or its most perceptive members acting representatively,turn, bend or re� ect back upon themselves, upon the relations, actions, symbols,meanings, codes, roles, statuses, social structures, ethical and legal rules, and othersociocultural components which make up their public “selves” ’ (Turner, 1987, p. 24).These ‘active agencies of change’, ranging from ‘designs for living’ to ‘judicial process’,are often ‘developmental’ through their potency subverting the normative structure.What the indigenous theatre performers build within themselves, with years of experi-ence, is a clear understanding of the psyche of the people—their dreams and hopes.They also carry within them an acute perception of how best to communicate with thepeople, especially in the rhythm of the language they use and the similes they employ.They are the ‘insiders’, not ‘outsiders’. However, theirs is a world-view which isretrogressive, and in most cases, the content of indigenous plays projects a fatalisticview of life which is recompensed only with complete devotion to patron saints or thedivinity. Why is it not possible to expose them, as I was, to some of the � nest wisdomof the world—to Freire and Boal, Stanislavsky and Brecht—and let them assimilatefrom this vast tradition? One important reason, at least in cultural terms, is the‘rural–urban’ divide which emerged in countries like Bangladesh during the colonisationera, as a result of which the rural areas have become backwaters—failures saddled byan elite moneyed group who exploit the land but reap the urban cream as well.

My argument in favour of the indigenous theatre is not simply advocacy forborrowing forms, for forms are very much linked with the content and both Proshikaand BITA have borrowed forms from the indigenous theatre, replacing the content withthe NGOs’ doctrine of development to create a sad imitation of the ‘original’ form. Myargument is in favour of a facilitation of bridging the urban–rural divide in countrieslike Bangladesh and providing opportunities for the indigenous performers to accessdirectly some of the best aspects of the world theatre tradition. It is not that it neverhappened. During the heydays of the Communist Party (1930s and 1940s), partyideologues convinced Ramesh Sheel (1877–1964), a performer of Kavi Gan, about aMarxist interpretation of history and society; consequently, he began to perform onissues such as Marxism and capitalism. If that could be done again on a greater scale,the indigenous performers of Bangladesh could adopt Freire and Boal on their ownterms and we would not have to spend time arguing over the rights and wrongs ofTheatre for Development.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Yor

k U

nive

rsity

Lib

rari

es]

at 0

9:15

19

Nov

embe

r 20

14

218 S. J. Ahmed

6. Conclusion

In a post-colonial globalised world, countries like Bangladesh may more fruitfullyexplore ‘Theatre for Development’ by examining ways and means of bridging theurban–rural divide which may make it possible for rural performers to access thecross-currents of intellectual fermentation of the North with a de-colonised mind.Perhaps then one would not need to worry about ‘intervention’, ‘participation’ and‘conscientisation’.

Wishing for a world without Theatre for Development, therefore, is wishing for aworld without the Third World—a world where all countries belong to the First World.It is wishing for a world where ‘development’ does not lead to globalisation—a worldwhere you do not need NGOs for development in the same way as you would not needdoctors, if there were no diseases to be cured. And hence you would not need to ‘barelymaintain […] the productivity of labour of the ordinary people’ to be fed and shelteredlike ‘livestock’. But perhaps that is only a Marxist dream or a religious fantasy. The � rstcrumbled after the fall of the Berlin Wall. And the second only promises the goods afteryou die. Even if my wish is non-materialisable (because it is not materialistic), let us atleast have just plain and simple theatre—theatre that never ceases to ‘develop’, theatrewhich allows debate, dialogue, re� exivity, dreaming the impossible and the � ight toin� nity.

Notes

[1] The � gure does not include Private Voluntary Development Organisations, organisationsregistered with the Directorate of Social Welfare, Directorate of Family Planning, Departmentof Women and Children’s Affairs and simply the non-registered tiny NGOs. The total � gure,including all these, may well be around 10,000.

[2] Proshika, one of the largest NGOs in Bangladesh, operates in 20,774 villages and 1,780 urbanslums and serves 10 million bene� ciaries.

[3] The NGOs registered with the NGO Affairs Bureau have received over US$3,000 million asgrants and material assistance from foreign donors since 1990–1991. However, it is alleged, the� gure may actually be much higher because not all the money has been cleared through theBureau.

[4] Current conversion rate stands at 83.83 Taka for 1 GBP.[5] A detailed analysis of how Freire has been co-opted in adult education, along with case studies,

is provided by Kidd and Kumar (1981).[6] Laedza Batanani, roughly translated as ‘Community Awakening’, was a non-formal education

project initiated in northern Botswana in 1974 by two adult educators, Ross Kidd and MartinByram, and a local community leader. Later, in 1981, Kidd and Byram critiqued the programmeas a process of domestication which had used pseudo-Freirean techniques. For details, see Kiddand Byram (1981).

References

AHMAD, M.M. (2001) The state, laws and non-governmental organisations (NGOs) in Bangladesh,International Journal of Not-for-Pro� t Law, 3(3), available at , www.icnl.org/ journal . .

AHMED, S.J. (2000) Acinpakhi In� nity: indigenous theatre in Bangladesh (Dhaka, University PressLimited).

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Yor

k U

nive

rsity

Lib

rari

es]

at 0

9:15

19

Nov

embe

r 20

14

A World without ‘Theatre for Development’ 219

BOAL, A. (1998) Legislative Theatre: using performance to make politics (London, Routledge).BOKUL, S.A. (2001) Unnayan Theatre O Amader Charcha (Dhaka, Samabesh).BRECHT, B. (1960) The life of Galileo, Plays: Volume I (London, Methuen).DUTTA, AROMA (1999) Message from Aroma Dutta, Executive Director at the PRIP Trust, to the

Development Forum Discussion Archives, www2.worldbank.orgEMBASSY OF BANGLADESH THE USA (2002) The ‘NGOs in Bangladesh’, www.bangladoot.org .KIDD, R. & BYRAM, M. (1981) Demystifying Pseudo-Freirean Non-formal Education: a case description

and analysis of Laedza Batanani (Toronto, Mimeograph).KIDD, R. & KUMAR, K. (1981) Co-opting Freire: a critical analysis of peseudo-Freirean adult education,

Economic and Political Weekly, 16(1–2), pp. 27–36.KIDD, R. & RASHID, M. (1984) Theatre by the people, for the people and of the people: people’s theatre

and landless organizing in Bangladesh, Bulletin of Concerned Asian Scholars, 16(1), pp. 30–45.NEW NATION, THE (2002) Dispute over use of funds by NGOs: Tk 1,600 cr pumped in by donors in

10 yrs, The New Nation (17 March).PROSHIKA (2000a) Summary of Proshika Activity Report, 1999–2000, www.proshika.orgPROSHIKA (2000b) People’s Cultural Programme (PCP), www.proshika.orgPROSHIKA (2002) About Proshika, Proshika Fabrics, www.bangladeshonline.comRAHMAN, A. (2000) Globalization and the Emerging Ideological Struggle, BIDS public lecture, July

2000, available at www.bids-bd.orgTURNER, V. (1987) The Anthropology of Performance (Cambridge, Cambridge University Press).ZAKI, N.A. (2002) Bangladesh Institute of Theatre Arts (BITA): their hour upon the stage,

www.hbfasia.org/pakistan/bita.htm

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Yor

k U

nive

rsity

Lib

rari

es]

at 0

9:15

19

Nov

embe

r 20

14