Unit 5 Drama : Mahesh Dattani. Final Solutions

Unit 5 Drama  Mahesh Dattani. Final Solutions

 Mahesh Dattani’s Final Solutions: A Comprehensive Critical Analysis

Mahesh Dattani, born in 1958 in Bangalore, is one of the most influential Indian English playwrights of contemporary theatre. Famous for addressing socially sensitive subjects such as gender conflict, communal tension, LGBTQ+ identity, and the anxieties of the Indian middle class, Dattani has shaped a new space for English drama in India. He is the first English-language playwright to receive the Sahitya Akademi Award, marking him as a central figure in modern Indian drama. His major works—Tara, Bravely Fought the Queen, Dance Like a Man, and Final Solutions—reflect his deep engagement with social psychology and the hidden violence of everyday life. Among these, Final Solutions occupies a special place because it confronts one of India’s deepest wounds: the legacy of communal division.

Final Solutions, written in 1993, is a play that examines how communal hatred is inherited, internalized, and enacted in Indian society. The title itself is ironic, suggesting that despite decades of political debates and social reforms, the “final solution” to communal conflict remains elusive. Dattani’s play shows that hatred does not arise suddenly during riots; it grows quietly in homes, in childhood stories, in memories, and in fears passed from one generation to another. By placing communal tension inside a single upper-middle-class Hindu home, Dattani brilliantly exposes how private prejudices mirror public violence.

The play begins with Daksha’s diary, set in 1947—the year of India’s independence and Partition. Daksha, later known as Hardika, recalls her youthful desire for friendship with Zarine, a Muslim girl. Through these diary entries, Dattani connects past trauma with present conflict. Daksha writes, “They taught me to hate, and I hated.” This line becomes the emotional foundation of the play. It reveals that hatred is transmitted like an inheritance, planted in children and then growing into adult prejudice. Through Hardika, Dattani shows how the wounds of Partition never healed completely but live on in memory.

The central plot unfolds when two Muslim boys, Javed and Bobby, seek shelter in the Gandhi household during a violent communal riot. The family—Ramnik, his orthodox wife Aruna, and the now-aged Hardika—react differently to this crisis. Their house becomes a miniature India, where history, guilt, fear, and prejudice collide. The conflict outside, symbolized by angry mobs, mirrors the conflict inside the family’s hearts.

One of Dattani’s most striking devices is the Chorus. Inspired by Greek theatre but adapted for an Indian context, the Chorus represents the faceless mob, the collective conscience, and the voice of society. They chant slogans like “Hand them over!” demonstrating how communal violence grows when individuals disappear into crowds. The actors wear masks, symbolizing the duplicity and hidden prejudices behind social respectability. Critics like Erin B. Mee note that Dattani “** exposes the violence hidden within the everyday middle-class home**.” The Chorus, with its shifting identity, reveals how society encourages fear and hatred while pretending to be moral.

The theme of identity plays a central role. Javed is a deeply conflicted young man who admits that he participated in violent acts because he was “trained to hate.” He seeks belonging, but extremist groups manipulate his emotions. His guilt and confusion represent the psychological vulnerability of youth caught in political violence. Bobby, however, is calm, sensitive, and rational. His character serves as a bridge between communities. One of the most powerful scenes is when Bobby touches the sacred Krishna idol. Aruna reacts with panic, rushing to purify it. Bobby’s reply—“Your God is not so weak”—challenges her rigid purity beliefs. In this moment, Dattani questions the idea that religion should be protected through exclusion. Bobby’s gentle boldness exposes the fragility of Aruna’s faith and suggests that true spirituality lies in acceptance, not fear.

Ramnik Gandhi, the patriarch, appears liberal and secular, but his liberalism hides a deep familial guilt. He reveals that his father took over the shop of Zarine’s family during the Partition riots. This historical injustice shapes Ramnik’s desire to protect Bobby and Javed. “I want you to stay… so that they will see what I see,” he says, hoping his family will confront their prejudices. Ramnik symbolizes the Indian middle class that believes in equality but remains guilty of past complicity. His struggle reflects the tension between moral idealism and inherited wrongdoing.

Aruna represents religious orthodoxy. Her obsession with ritual purity, daily puja, and avoidance of Muslims in the house reflects how fear becomes disguised as devotion. She is not malicious; she is anxious. Her religion does not provide peace but acts as a shield against insecurity. Through her character, Dattani shows how communalism is often rooted in emotional fear rather than deliberate hatred. Aruna’s transformation at the end, though small, suggests that change is possible.

The play’s symbolism enriches its meaning.

• The Krishna idol symbolizes purity, divinity, and inclusiveness. Bobby’s touch challenges the idol’s perceived fragility.

• The masks worn by the Chorus represent hypocrisy, societal duplicity, and the dual face of every human being.

• Daksha’s diary symbolizes memory, pain, and the repetition of prejudice through generations.

• The riot outside symbolizes the riot inside—anger, guilt, fear, and confusion.

Dattani’s stagecraft is modern and psychological. He uses parallel timelines, fragmented dialogue, ritualistic movements, and realistic settings to create tension. The absence of dramatic melodrama makes the play intimate and intense.

Comparison with Other Writers

Several Indian writers have addressed similar themes:

Vijay Tendulkar’s Ghashiram Kotwal deals with mob violence, political manipulation, and social brutality. Like Dattani, Tendulkar shows how crowds lose individual morality and become instruments of cruelty.

Girish Karnad’s Tughlaq explores political unrest, religious conflict, and public anger. Both playwrights reveal how leaders manipulate religious divisions for power.

Asghar Wajahat’s Jis Lahore Nai Dekhya O Jamyai Nai presents Hindu-Muslim relations during Partition with emotional depth. Like Daksha’s diary, Wajahat shows the personal wounds inflicted by historical events.

Khushwant Singh’s Train to Pakistan and Bhisham Sahni’s Tamas portray Partition’s brutality and question communal hatred. These works, like Dattani’s, emphasize that no community is purely victim or villain; everyone suffers when hatred wins.

Critics Who Admire Dattani

Many critics praise Final Solutions for its honesty:

Aparna Dharwadker argues that Dattani reveals how “identity in India is shaped by communal memory.” She praises the play for exploring the psychological inheritance of prejudice.

Lakshmi Subramanian claims that the play shows the “fragility of secularism in middle-class India,” appreciating Dattani’s realistic portrayal of fear.

Erin B. Mee commends Dattani for exposing the hidden violence within respectable households.

Critics Who Oppose Dattani

However, Dattani’s ideas are not accepted uncritically.

Rakesh H. Solomon believes the play reduces a political problem to a personal, domestic issue. He argues that communalism cannot be explained only through middle-class psychology.

Nandi Bhatia claims that Dattani creates a “false symmetry” between Hindu and Muslim communities, treating them as equally prejudiced while ignoring real power differences.

Niloufer Bharucha criticizes the ending as too optimistic, suggesting that reconciliation is unrealistic in the face of structural violence.

Shanta Gokhale argues that Dattani’s characters feel overly symbolic at times, turning the play into a moral lecture.

Some conservative critics accuse Dattani of being “too critical of Hindu society,” suggesting his portrayal is imbalanced.

These opposing views show that while Final Solutions is powerful, it remains open to debate.

Conclusion

Mahesh Dattani’s Final Solutions is a deeply relevant and courageous exploration of communalism in contemporary India. Through the Gandhi household, Dattani shows how prejudice hides in everyday conversations, rituals, and memories. His nuanced characters—Ramnik’s guilt, Aruna’s fear, Hardika’s trauma, Javed’s confusion, and Bobby’s empathy—represent the diverse emotional responses to communal conflict. The Chorus and its masks expose society’s hypocrisy, while symbols like the Krishna idol and Daksha’s diary deepen the play’s thematic richness.

Though critics debate the extent of Dattani’s political engagement, the play’s emotional truth remains powerful. It reminds us that communal hatred cannot be resolved by political strategies alone. The real solutions lie in dialogue, introspection, and the courage to question inherited prejudice. In this sense, Dattani’s play does not offer a final solution; instead, it opens a necessary conversation—one that India must continue to have.