Plays can evoke powerful feelings, pose difficult questions, and spark meaningful conversations. Nathuram Godse Must Die is a contentious play written by well-known filmmaker Bharat Dabholkar, who is most known for his witty advertisements. It appears from the title that the man who killed Mahatma Gandhi, Godse, is incorrect. People’s reactions to the play’s content have conflicted, leading some to question the play’s actual message. This article examines the dispute, the way the play depicts Godse, the reactions of the audience, and the historical significance of it.

The History of the Debate

During Atal Bihari Vajpayee’s first NDA government in the early 2000s, the current debate got its start. During that period, a few Hindu nationalists attempted to cast doubt on the widespread reverence for Mahatma Gandhi. Gandhi’s executioner, Nathuram Godse, was made to appear heroic by means of a Marathi drama written by Pradeep Dalvi called Mee Nathuram Boltey (I Am Nathuram Speaking). This altered the conversation around Gandhi’s legacy.

This story has since been turned into an English drama, Nathuram Godse Must Die, by Bharat Dabholkar, in a more assertive political period. The play has come under fire for portraying God as a hero, despite the title’s suggestion that he ought to be punished.

Propagandist Aspect of the Play

Nathuram Godse Must Die’s extreme bias is its most concerning feature. The drama frequently seems to support Godse, despite its claims to be fair. Many have been astonished by this, as they were expecting a more fair assessment of history.

Many well-educated, upper-class individuals nodded, laughed, and even cheered during the play at a performance in Bandra’s St. Andrew’s Auditorium. Concerns about how this revised narrative of history might affect some people are raised by this reaction.

The three French audience members who expressed enthusiasm for Godse’s portrayal—a young man and two young women—was a startling moment. It’s troubling that they, along with some Indian viewers, were moved by this skewed account of events even though they might not be well-versed in India’s political past.

Historical Errors in Nathuram Godse Must Die

Many made-up stories and fake facts can be found in the play. It presents a false impression of the circumstances surrounding Gandhi’s murder, giving some people reason to believe a lie. For instance, Devdas, the son of Gandhi, is inaccurately shown as a lawyer who wishes to defend Godse. Actually, Devdas never practiced law and had no acquaintance with Godse.

Another bizarre image features Zubaida, a woman, displaying love and reverence for Godse while donning a burqa. According to rumors, she is the sister of Inspector Sheikh, a fictional figure who also develops feelings for Godse. These sections alter the historical account and are wholly fictitious.

Viewer reaction and Bias

One of the play’s most concerning aspects is the audience’s reaction. Numerous guests, who appeared well-educated and arrived in fancy cars, were pleased with the way Godse was praised. This demonstrates a troubling tendency toward disbelieving historical accounts in favor of dramatic ones

The great-granddaughter of B.G. Kher, the Chief Minister of Bombay at the time of Gandhi’s assassination, Mrinalini Kher was introduced to the writer at the same function. Concerning the number of people who are unaware of the truth regarding the plot to assassinate Gandhi, Mrinalini voiced her worries. She emphasized that despite being aware of the plan, a number of influential people opted to disregard it.

The Hidden Bias of Bharat Dabholkar

Despite his claim to objectivity, Bharat Dabholkar’s rendition of the play blatantly favors praising Godse. When he invited the audience to Godse’s Pune home to view his possessions at the end of the presentation, it was clear how biased he was. This was an attempt to defend Godse’s behavior and demonstrate his support for Godse.

Compared to Pradeep Dalvi, the author of the original Marathi drama, Dabholkar has greater resources and connections because of his schooling and experience in advertising. But rather than portraying Godse’s crime honestly, his version causes more harm by elevating and distorting the character.

Demand for Historical Accuracy

Political science professor and eminent scholar Y.D. Phadke chastised the Marathi adaptation of the play for having invented characters like Inspector Sheikh and Sub-Inspector Sawant, who didn’t exist at the time of the trial. The inclusion of such imaginary features merely serves to obscure the facts and keep the general people from realizing them.

The significance of maintaining historical authenticity is brought home by this drama. Revisionist narratives can gain traction and potentially have a harmful impact on public perception when prominent individuals and playwrights, such as Dabholkar, choose to falsify the truth.

An Expanded View: The Kapoor Commission

When we consider the conclusions of the Kapoor Commission, the deceptive elements of Dabholkar’s play become even more concerning. The Indian government established this panel in 1965 to look into the possible conspiracy that led to Gandhi’s death. Important supporting documentation, including intelligence reports and witness accounts concerning the hateful plot, was included in the now-missing report.

Recalling the perilous forces that conspired to assassinate Mahatma Gandhi, Teesta Setalvad’s book Beyond Doubt: A Dossier on Gandhi’s Assassination draws our attention back to this report.

In conclusion

Beyond the confines of the theater, a discussion has been triggered by Bharat Dabholkar’s play Nathuram Godse Must Die. It poses important queries concerning how history is portrayed, how contentious individuals are elevated, and how artists influence public opinion. Notwithstanding the play’s assertions of objectivity, the narrative presents a different picture and runs the risk of misrepresenting one of the saddest episodes in Indian history to the general audience. In particular, when it comes to individuals like Mahatma Gandhi, whose legacy continues to influence India’s future, we must continue to be watchful and insist on accuracy in the historical narratives.

FAQ