Dandin's Method of Narration

DANDIN’S METHOD OF NARRATION

DR MAAN SINGH, M. A., Ph. D.
Centre for Post-graduate Studies, Himachal Pradesh University, Simla

We have established elsewhere on the grounds ofoverwhelhming evidences, both external and internal, that the extant Avantisundariis a genuine prelude of the extant Dashakumaracaritaproper and that the original name of the entire prose romance was Avantisundarithe name Dashakumaracaritafor the portion now available separately as the Dashakumaracaritaproper being the work of some later writer. The following lines are aimed at presenting a critical analysis of Dandin’s method of narration as exhibited by him in his prose romance.

There may be three types of narrative in a novel, viz., description, scene and summary. In a description, the novelist halts his moving world to tell us what he sees. When he moves it slowly and tells us about single specifications, including the actions like speech and thought, the narrative is a scene.¹But when the novelist rolls his fictitious world swiftly so as to traverse the large tracts of the world of his novel, which are necessary forthe story, but not worth dwelling long upon–not worth narrating in the specific details of a scene; and the details are, under such circumstances, not discernible, he does not give each specific detail, but gives only a summarized account of things. This type of narrative is called a Summary. ²

Dandin has employed in his prose romance all of these types of narrative according to the situations. He has used description in profusion. The long narrative of his prose romance contains many descriptions. For example, reference may be made here to his description of King Punyavarman of Vidarbha through Nalijangha.³ Instead of putting into the mouth of Nalijangha the moving pageant of his romance, i.e., the direct answer to the queries of Vishruta, he halts it and puts the description ofthe virtuoyus King Punyavarman. The author thus uses here the type of narration termed description.

For an instance of the scene, we may refer to the description of the ball-dance of Kandukavati ⁴ where the author gives every specific detail of the activities of Princess Kandukavati during her ball-dance. The reader feels as though he himself were a witness to the ball-dance. The only interval between the occurrence of the ball-dance and the reader hearing about it is that which is occupied by the novelist’s voice telling about it.

The Summary is illustrated by Dandin’s⁵ short description of the amorous delights of youths. The author here does not tell us about all the activities at night except the amorous dalliances of youths of unfaded pride; but summing up them all, he states that ‘the night came to a close in this way’ Summary is, therefore, the type of narration here.

In narrating the story, Dandin has adopted three methods, the direct or epic, the autobiographical, and the documentary. In the direct method of narration, the novelist is a historian narrating from outside; in the autobiographical, he writes in the first person identifying himself with one of his characters and thus offers us with an imaginary autobiography; and in the documentary, he unfolds the action by means of letters, diaries, contributed narratives and miscellaneous documents.⁶ Except the descriptions of Kanchi, Pallava King Simhavishnuvarman, Dandin’s own lineage, King Rajahamsa and his queen Vasumati, preparation and March of armies for battle, their fight, Rajahamsa’s defeat by Manasara with the divine aid, the steeds’ taking him from the battlefield in wounded and unconscious state to the Vindhya forest where his queen and ministers are living in safety, the queen’s sorrow and her resolve on immolating herself in grief at the loss of her first son Hamsavahana taken away by a Vidyadhara in the form of a swan, her determination to follow her husband in death, the king’s restoration to health and visit with his queen to the hermitage of his father great sage Vamadeva and then residing in the hermitage of his father Ripunjaya, their austerities in order to get a son, the birth of their second son Rajavahana, Taravali’s account of Arthapala, Shaunaka, Shudraka and Kamapala as told to her by Kubera, the origin of horse Bhadravahana and elephant Hemakuta as narrated by Vamadeva, and Rajavahana’s departure for world conquest–are presented in the direct method, almost the entire text of the available portion of Dandin’s prose romance relates its narrative autobiographical manner. The documentary method finds place in the love-messages of Kamapala and Kantimati.⁷ Rajavahana and Avantisundari, and in Apaharavarman’s love-couplet expressive of his longing for Princess Ambalika. The direct historic method has provided the author witha great scope and freedom of movement: and the autobiographical method has helped him imbibe a keen and intimate interest and a sense of realism. In the employment of the autobiographical method, he has succeeded in bringing all his material within the compass of the supposed narrator’s knowledge and power and in giving a true personal tone to the narrative. Thus the narratives of the Kumaras, told in this method, are very interesting and realistic in tone. The author has infused much vigour and life into them. The documentary method does not find a prominent place in Dandin’s prose romance; but even the meagre use of it deserves appreciation.

The device of inserting stories within stories is a characteristic feature of Dandin’s method of narration. In his prose romance, we come across King Rajahamsa’s relation of the report of a Yaksha of what Kubera told him to communicate to Potapa,⁸ the ascetic Somasharman’s report of the relation of the child Pushpodbhava’s nurse of what Suvrata and Ratnodbhava, the child’s parents, narrated to her about their past lives; the queen Vasumati’s account of Taravali’s report of Kubera’s relation of the stories of Shaunaka, Shudraka, Kamapala and his son Arthapala; Matanga’s account of Citragupta’s relation of the stories of Nityogra and Mahogra; Mandakini’s account of Vaishampayana’s report of sage Jabali’s relation of the stories of Mahashveta and Kadambari; and Arthapala’s narration of Purnabhadra’s recounting of Kamapala’s narration of his own story.⁹ Again we find four interesting stories of Dhumini, Gomini, Nimbavati and Nitambavati within Mantragupta’s narrative of his adventures. A grave defect has crept into Dandin’s narrative art on account of adopting this device of emboxing tales. The reader is often lost in the inset stories and it becomes difficult for him to keep in his head the main stories in which they are inserted till he returns to them. Besides, the inset stories slacken the natural flow of the main stories and consequently of the main narrative of the entire romance. It is only in Mitragupta’s narrative that the inclusion of the stories of Dhumini, Gomini, Nimbavati and Nitambavati is so skilfully and artistically wrought that they neither pose much difficulty for the reader to keep in his mind the main story nor impede the natural flow thereof.

A characteristic feature of Dandin’s method of narration is to preserve the sense of surprise and mystery by introducing startling incidents. In his prose romance, the element of surprise is found in the changing of a lotus into a Vidyadhara and his vanishing after making obeisance to the image of Vishnu at the seashore of Mahamallapuram; ¹⁰ in Matanga’s plunging into the sacred fire and rising therefrom with a sword in his hand, bracelets on his arms, a crown on his head and seated in a fiery chariot (agniratha); in the magical marriage of Rajavahana and Avantisundari; in the transforming of a chain into a divine damsel Suratamanjari; in Apaharavarman’s bluffing the policemen by feigning death by snake poison; in Arthapala’s finding a beautiful maiden in an underground mansion; in Pramati’s finding himself transplanted on a damsel’s couch from the forest where he sleeps at night and his being transferred again to the same place, in his passing into the harem of King Dharmavardhana of Shravasti in the guise of a marriageable young girl and living there in the company of his daughter Navamalika undiscovered; and in Mantragupta’s disguise as a great ascetic as well as in Vishruta’s disguise as a mendicant without being recognized. Dandin’s narration of the story is also characterized by the element of mystery. The very beginning of his narrative springs up from a mystery. Dandin narration and his companions behold a lotus floating over the sea, which moves slowly towards the image of Vishnu on the seashore of Mahamallapuram and touching its feet transforms into a Vidyadhara, who Vanishes making obeisance to the deity. This mysterious incident is explained away by Dandin by narrating the story of Avantisundari, which his prose romance contains; but which is not available to us in its complete form on account of the incomplete text. Another instance of mystery is found in Pramati’s finding himself on the couch of a damsel wondrous beauty in a magnificent mansion, though he sleeps under a tree in the wild forest and again, after awaking from sleep, seeing himself at that very spot in the jungle. This mystery is unfolded by the author in the account of Yakshini Taravali, who, appearing before Pramati, tells all about the incident. The element of surprise and mystery keeps the flare of the interest of the reader unflickered throughout, though the introduction of incredible incidents and supernatural element gives the plot a semblance of improbability and laborious artifice and does violence to the naturalness of the story.

Fortunately Dandin does not employ a pedantic and difficult style. His style keeps pace with his narrative and subject-matter. “In the initial stage, Dandin’s style is elaborate; there are long compounds and sentences extending over a page and abundance of shleshaof different varieties; but as we proceed further, the style changes to suit the subject-matter, as permitted by the great critic Anandavardhana, and we find a simpler style, pithy and well turned expressions gracefully arranged, and long descriptions alternating with vivid scenes charged with rapidity of action. In spite of the hopelessly fragmentary nature of the text, one can see Dandin here in the sweet diction, the picturesque characterization and other features that we are familiar with in the Dashakumara”. ¹¹ In this second fragment available as the Dashakumaracaritaproper, too, Dandin changes his style to suit his narrative and subject-matter. Sometimes he employs a simple style devoid of long compounds; but sometimes he uses a difficult style abounding in long compounds and high-sounding expressions as, for example, in the descriptions of the sleeping Princesses Ambalika¹² and Navamalika, Taravali, the ball-dance of Princess Kandukavati , the spring season and the enjoyment of pleasures by Kardana, King of Kalinga, and the Sun. In both the available fragments of his long prose romance Avantisundari, he adjusts his descriptions according to the action of his narrative and puts them where the action of the narrative is not very speedy and where the characters stop to witness or to think of an object of vital importance. In the descriptions, monotony is carefully avoided. The elaborate and ornate style used in the initial stage changesto be simpler as the narrative proceeds further.

References

¹ Cf. Phyllis Bentley: Some Observations on the Art of Narrative p. 7.
² Cf. Ibid. Pp. 7-8, 11.
³ Dashakumaracarita, Ed. Narayana Rarna Acharya, Nirnaya Sagara Press, Bombay. 15th Edition 1951. Pp. 252, line 10-254, line 5. For translation see A. W. Ryder: The Ten Princes, Jaico Education (J-56), Bombay. 1956. Pp. 153-4; M. R. Kale: Dashakumaracarita, Motilal Banarasidass, Delhi. 4th Edition, 1966. p. 133.
⁴ DashakumaracaritaPp. 210, line 5-213, line 3. For translation see A. W. Ryder: Op. Cit., Pp. 105-7.
⁵ Avantisundari, Trivandrum Sanskri Series No. 172, Trivandrum. 1954. p. 72, lines3-9.
⁶ W. H. Hudson: Intrduction to the Study of Literature, London, reprinted in 1958. p. 143.
⁷ Avantisundari, p. 202, lines 14-5 (Avantisundari Kathasara, Ed: G. Harihara Sastri, Kuppuswami Sastri Research Institute, Mylapore. Madras. 1957: IV 206); Avantisundari Kiithasara, IV 212.
⁸ Vide Avantisundari, Pp. 175, line 11-185, Line 10.
193, line 7.
⁹ Dashakumaracarita, Pp. 169, line 6-179, line 6.
Pp. 218, line 1-234, line 11.
¹⁰ Avantisundari, Pp. 15-7.
¹¹ G. Harihara Sastri: Avantisundari Kathasara, Introduction. p. v.
¹³ Dashakumaracarita, Pp. 128, line 9-131, line 3.