Nila Shah has elegantly translated Bhagwandas Patel’s 1997 edition of Bhilonum bharatha, a version of the Mahabharata performed among “the Dungri Bhils living in the Khedbrahma and Danta districts near the northern border between Rajasthan and Gujarat” (xxii). Singers offer a prosimetric presentation; instrumentalists provide accompaniment. Shah supplies a few explanatory notes, but this work is not a scholarly edition: above all, the volume does not include the original language text.[1]
Two separate forewords explain the rationale behind this publication. In the first, Rajesh Sachdeva positions Patel’s act of textualization amidst a larger project intended to recognize the numerous languages of India and work toward “the empowerment of the smaller mother tongues” (vii). In the second foreword, Ganesh Devy observes that, as many other epic traditions do for their practitioners, Bharath contributes to the Bhils’ cultural identity. Critically, however, Patel’s work preserves a tradition of a “community that has been facing untold material disadvantage” (xv). Moreover, in so far as it accesses “[t]he voice of the tribals themselves,” it works to “rescue” the study of Indian folklore “from its colonial entrapment” (xii).
A significant challenge posed by this book comes in the make-up of Patel’s text. In the preface, Patel describes his fieldwork:
“Initially, I started with Devabhai Lalabhai Khant of Panthal village of Danta district in Gujarat. But he knew only a few pankhdis of the narrative. Later, I was introduced to Nathabhai Bhurabhai Gamar of Khedva village, a place seventeen kilometers from Khedbrahma. Being a nephew of the sage-singer, late Nanjibhai Lakhabhai Khant, he knew nearly the entire narrative. Eventually, between 1984 to 1987 all the episodes of Bhilo nu Bharath were recorded on four hundred audio cassettes.” (xxii)
“Most episodes of Bhilo nu Bharat were recorded during their actual narration-performance. A few episodes, however, were documented later, at the leisure of the sage-singer. The recorded version was verified by another sage-singer, Vajabhai Kehrabhai Gamar of Nava Mota village. In addition, some details missed out in the oral narration, were discussed with several singers and added at a later stage.” (xxiv)
From this description, it is impossible to tell who contributed what and when they did so to Patel’s text. It is best to treat it as a composite text comprising discrete performances by different poets, or at least as a close relative of a composite text, one comprising mainly the work of one poet but supplemented with the discrete input of other poets. The majority of folklorists do not look kindly on composite texts. John William Johnson, a collector of oral poetry in both Mandekan and Somali, writes:
“This method is flawed in a number of ways. A composite text is one that is actually recited by no one at all, so that the textualization of such a text does not actually represent an authentic performance. Its narrative structure cannot realistically be related to any local social structures. And the comparison of variants for the purposes of studying either literary or social relevance is impossible.” (2000: 239)[2]
To be sure, some researchers were still advocating for the assemblage of composite texts at the turn of the twenty-first century (see, e.g., Knappert 2000), but such constructions remain problematic.
[1] For a scholarly study of Bharath, see Yajnik 2004: 1-29.
[2] Cf. Honko 2000b: 46-47, Reichl 2000: 107, and Reynolds 2000: 269.
Works Cited
Honko, Lauri, ed. 2000a. Textualization of Oral Epics. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
-----------------, 2000b. “Text as Process and Practice: The Textualization of Oral Epics.” In Honko 2000a: 3-54.
Johnson, John William. 2000. “Authenticity and Oral Performance: Textualizing the Epics of Africa for Western Audiences.” In Honko 2000a: 237-246.
Knappert, Jan. 2000. “The Textualization of Swahili Epics.” In Honko 2000a: 247-262.
Patela, Bhagavanadasa. 1997. Bhilonum bharatha: Khedabrahma talukana Bhilomam pracalita kanthastha paramparanum Mahabharata ane anya lokakhyano. Khedabrahma: Setha Ke. Ti. Haiskula.
Reichl, Karl. 2000. “Silencing the Voice of the Singer: Problems and Strategies in the Editing of Turkic Oral Epics.” In Honko 2000a: 103-127.
Reynolds, Dwight F. 2000. “Creating an Epic: From Apprenticeship to Publication.” In Honko 2000a: 263-277.
Yajnik, H. 2004. A Study in Tribal Literature of Gujarat. Edited by Bhagvandas Patel; translated by N. M. Kansara. Mumbai: Nayan Suryanand Loka-Pratishthan.
--------
[Review length: 696 words • Review posted on November 21, 2013]