“And
obviously the thing that has to happen is change; political change. If there’s
a change in our political dispensation, if we have a new way of looking at
life, a new way of looking at ourselves as a people, a new way of appreciating
diversity of opinion, until that happens, I don’t see that being easy for us to
build a vibrant culture of theatre” (Dzatsunga, 2008)
Samuel Ravengai: Obviously
theatre is not as vibrant as it was in the yesteryears. Tell me how it was in
the yesteryears and how it is like today.
David Dzatsunga: In
the yester years, we are talking about the late 80s and the bulk of the 90s. It
was possible to run a club. You could go out and hold performances in schools,
colleges and other institutions. You could also get funding from NGOs. You
could be commissioned to do productions. Some NGOs involved in some outreach
work, and even government departments, used to hire us for Theatre in Education
campaigns like HIV/AIDS, tuberculosis, family planning and things like that. So
really, there was a diverse source of funding which made it possible for us to
maintain a full time theatre arrangement where we all pay our actors and
actress. They were reasonably happy and did not see any need to seek
alternative employment. And, then of course, we could perform anywhere we felt
like. Basically, that was the environment that we operated in then prior to the
period that I was talking about.
SR: What
went wrong?
DD: Probably
the umbrella word is politics. With all these development to do with the land
reform, the advent of the vibrant opposition party, the MDC, and the various
pieces of legislation that have been described as rather draconic. The
environment in fact, immediately became rather stifling for theatre
practitioners. There was POSA where you were saying now you couldn’t just
automatically find yourself with a gathering of people without explanation to the
authorities. There was AIPPA sometimes we were told that our plays needed to be
censored and the relevant ministry needed to know what was in our plays. And
then the schools themselves were not very open. They could not independently
give our groups slots to perform to the students. They needed some clearance
either from the National Arts Council or the regional directors, or such
authorities. And it is becoming increasingly difficult to access institutions
which used to sustain theatre clubs. For some time, we went off the bill
because the problem now had to do with the NGOs Bill which I think had
provisions that regulated the funding of organizations. So it became very
difficult really, to access these NGOs and as a result we discovered that we
could not get out productions commissioned by them. Resultantly, we could not
pay actors as constantly or remunerate them meaningfully, and so we did not run
rehearsals. Actors increasingly became hungry, and with the hunger we had a lot
of conflicts within the actors or among the actors as a result of
misunderstanding of the cause of our distress. It was like the blame game where
we are now saying, like what has been happening in certain political situations
where you blame this tribe B for your poverty. It’s all politics. So we ended
up having all these conflicts in the groups, and naturally, the groups
disintegrated. All actors started moving away from the town going to South
Africa. Like in our particular kind of place, you have South Africa as a lure
for most young people. So we have quite a number of our actors just migrating
to that country. Others tried to go into chikorokoza, as we call it, so
they would just come into town spend the whole day in a queue, buy some sugar
for resale and things like that. And in our case also we have Harare-Beitbridge
highway which is quite lucrative for some youths who have the energy to go out
there at night and probably buy fuel from long distance haulage trucks and
things like that. Foreign currency deals. Some of them made it as a result of
that. They became better off than they were as theatre artists, and it has
become very difficult to bring them back into theatre because there really is
nothing on the ground to show that there’s hope for theatre in this particular
place.
SR: Now
that’s why you come to the conclusion that theatre is not as vibrant as it was
in the 80s or early 90s so to speak?
DD: Yes,
largely because there were many theatre clubs competing for a name. In this
town alone, small as it is, you could have five or four theatre clubs, and
there were always theatre clubs sometimes mushrooming and dying. But there was
a vibrant theatre industry to the extent that you could actually say unionise.
At some time we thought we could unionise theatre as artists in order for us to
be able to bargain meaningfully with the other stakeholders for example, those
who were commissioning us and those who were giving us jobs.
SR: Now,
you raised a very important issue which wasn’t an issue in the 80s and 90s, the
rise of a vibrant opposition political party. And you are saying it has got a
bearing on this death of theatre in Masvingo and probably at national level.
Would you like to explain how that brings about that scenario?
DD: I
believe that with the rise of that development, what the ruling party, or the
government rather, I think became paranoid because this party had a lot of
urban support. And as a consequence, there was need to legislate against any
perceived support or activities that may be deemed to support this opposition
party. Government now wanted to control information dissemination because it
was not going to be possible now to simply write what you think, put it on
stage and perform it to an audience. And it became increasingly important to
government to make sure that the content and movement of information was in
their control. So I believe again that’s where AIPPA comes in, that’s where
POSA comes in, that’s where all these other instruments that have been
legislated come in to control the movement of information. Or even the NGOs
bill, government was now of the perception that most NGOs had their sympathies
with the opposition, and most of the NGOs that supported theatre were in one
way or the other involved in governance.
And theatre as a tool for information dissemination naturally requires
that you gather people, and gathering people becomes something that is
threatening to the government.
SR: Now, would you like to be more particular,
especially as it regards to Masvingo or theatre groups that you know that were
directly affected by these pieces of legislation? Do you have any particular
examples?
DD: An
immediate example would be our own club, SIYA Cultural Theatre Club. Our thrust
as a club, and my thrust as a writer, has always been protest theatre. We are
saying ‘okay we have plays that try, from our own perspective, to mirror the
society as we saw it and to probably put across what could be considered
controversial issues’. We deal with things to do with corruption, elements to
do with land and all these things that concern people’s lives and which people
talk a lot about with regards to their own rights. We have times when we worked
with the Zimbabwe Human Rights Organisation. We had a play that we had done, Tafi,
which is short for Tafirenyika. That was in 1999 where we were looking
at the plight of the ex-combatants before they became aligned to the ruling
party. But we were simply looking at the fact that there was neglect of
ex-fighters, and some of them had actually degenerated into hoodlums of the
city and most of them were victims of corruption in high places where you find
that the leaders in power were deliberately neglecting them. We are simply
looking at neo-colonialism per se. So in that play we were commissioned
by ZimRights to perform that play. We took it around the province then in 1999.
I remember during those days we always had the CIOs as guests of our
performances. They were always around, following us around.
SR: Did
they in any way physically, directly or indirectly try to stifle you?
DD: No! They
were just there. You would feel that their presence was not welcome because it
was intrusive. And you could tell that they were trying to intimidate us by
simply being present in their dark glasses, quite conspicuous all the times. So
you wouldn’t feel comfortable in that kind of situation, especially if you were
knowledgeable about their track record.
SR: We all
know what they were doing, particularly during the 80s early 90s.
DD: Ya, ya!
Personally, I also happen to have had that kind of experience. I happen to have
been arrested by them at some time. During the days of the Zimbabwe Unity
Movement, I was perceived to have probably campaigned in a class room. I was
taken to their offices, close by here. I spent about three days in there. I was
interrogated intimidated, humiliated and so forth. But I’m saying I have that
prior experience. But I continue writing because writing is a dream, so you cannot
censor yourself. The moment you want to be insincere, you find yourself failing
to really bring out the artist in you.
SR: Let’s
come to your writing. Apart from Tafi which you did in 1999, what else
did you do?
DD: Voice
which we did in 1992. It dealt with disability awareness. But it was
political as well, the politics of disability if you like. I wrote the one
titled Sungai Dzibate. It had to do with the ESAP, the whole question of
ESAP where the president was urging us to tighten our belts.
SR: Anything else?
DD: In 1993
I did one that entered for National Winter Festival, under the auspices of
Masvingo Drama Circle, titled Nhamo/Troubles. We were collaborating. My
school was collaborating with Masvingo Drama Circle and I’m sure we won the
Dominic Convent Trophy for developing Zimbabwean theatre. The National Winter Festival as you would
know was mainly an elite festival, mostly for the whites. We entered it as a
community theatre production that was then adapted to a proscenium arch stage.
SR: Now,
you seem to be silent about 2000 to 2008. Could what you’ve been talking about
partly influenced that lack of vibrancy, liveliness of theatre?
DD: Ya! From
2000 onwards it became very difficult to bring actors together, that was the
major impediment.
SR: So can
we say for you it’s a dry patch, 2000 to 2008?
DD: Ya, it’s
a dry patch. I did a bit 2000. I’ve done a few works here and there but really,
it’s the lowest ebb of my career.
Grace: After Nhamo/Troubles
what other productions do you have?
DD: There
are quite a number. I do have scripts for some, but some were just improvised
by the actors when they were on stage. I can write them anytime, whenever I
want to script them. I did one which is Idler’s Corner. Idler’s
Corner is based on the days when we had the Daily News and The
Herald. It’s looking at media polarisation, and the politics that is being
played in the media. You have characters
on both sides of the political divide, each trying to justify their own, why
they support this side and not that side.
SR: Now, have you performed this?
DD: We
performed it here at the Charles Austin Theatre, again at the National Winter
Festival. We were asked by the Drama Circle to come and perform as guests. But
we have also performed it for audiences here, in and around Masvingo, mostly between
2000 and 2001. ... I have also done Matroubles which is looking at the
youths and HIV/AIDS.
Grace Maguri: (interjecting) Can I ask about other drama groups that you
know? You now are talking about your personal experiences. But what have you
also seen about other drama groups? Are they any drama groups that the
establishment has used?
DD: Not that
I know of. I know there have been drama clubs, but mostly the establishment
does not like using drama clubs. They would rather use dance clubs. ...So when
you try to perform at their events as a drama club, they are not comfortable.
But if you are going we have Heroes Theatre Company here. I wouldn’t say they support the
establishment, but what we have discovered is that because they dance Imbube
and other dances. They are from Bulawayo actually, but they came and settled
here. They do get jobs to perform at
national events and for the establishment here and there, simply because they
sing and dance. But for those of us who have a mind and who would like to say
things, it’s not easy to then find a stand to perform on these events. So
that’s what I can say. I can’t think of a drama club that has really endeared
itself to the political leadership of the province on the ruling party side.
Grace: What’s
your way forward?
DD: Personally,
it’s very difficult to see under the current environment how best we can go
forward. I know it will really take a lot to bring actors back to the rehearsal
room and back onto the stage, because really unless there’s funding coming from
elsewhere, not really to believe that can be channelled towards an effort to
build an audience, until that is done. I don’t see theatre really reviving out
of the efforts of the artists here on their own. The artists need some help,
they need a helping hand. They need to be brought back on to the stage. There are there. Even today, if you were
going to say you want a production and you want us to do some work for you, it
wouldn’t take me a day to gather artist who are rotting in the townships there
and come up with a production. It’s not a problem as long as there is an
incentive. It’s a question of saying you guys there’s so much money for you,
let’s do this. So really, I believe that the only possibility for the revival
of theatre especially in this town lies in some Good Samaritan probably coming
down here to fund some activities. That may then convince artists that there’s
life.
SR: Or probably
when the economy improves.
DD: And
obviously the thing that has to happen is change: political change. If there’s
a change in our political dispensation, if we have a new way of looking at
life, a new way of looking at ourselves as a people, a new way of appreciating
diversity of opinion, until that happens, I don’t see that being easy for us to
build a vibrant culture of theatre.
Samuel Ravengai (Interview inside my car: Masvingo CBD)