On my post regarding Boyer, I received an email from someone telling me, " Your
remarks of the above stink or are you just being a typical Goan who cannot
bear to see another Goan get some praise and acknowledgment. Could these
comments be a personal grudge."
My reply:
Can you specify which comments of mine on Boyer stink? Do you mean my mention
of Succorine? Do you know the politics in Konknni tiatr world as better as I do?
Did you fail to read the praise I lavished on him?
--
The same person replies again:
The politics in Konkani tiatr world must be the same as the politics in Goa
today. Anyway this was not the time to come out with your comments, there is a
time and place for everything.
---
What the person does not understand is what I written is NOT the same as
delivering an eugoly. It is ethical not to mention the deceased bad points or
wrongdoings in an eulogy.
But when one is doing an assessment, especially from an independent point of
view, unlike what Tomazinho Cardozo has written of his fellow tiatrist, it is
fair to mention some of the negative points. However big an icon Boyer was, he
was not above petty politics that continues to rule the tiatr world.
I had respect for me but, at the same time, I also criticized his role in a
play or his own play. Tomazinho says, "But, the one tiatr which created history
was "Ekuch Rosto". It was penned by M Boyer and was based on communal harmony
shared between the two major communities of Goa."
I disagreed on the main point of the story. Inter-religious marriages between a
Goan Catholic boy and a Goan Hindu girl and vice versa is not the ONLY
solution. It is not the "only road" to preserving Goa's communal harmony.
This is simplistic solution. I think Tomazinho also staged a play on Goan unity
(I forget the name). It was granted exemption from the entertainment tax. I
attended the tiatr in Vasco.
Tomazinho too says, "That M Boyer was a gifted performer was manifested by his
ability to mesmerize audiences through his extempore composition of lyrics on
stage."
Fausto writes:
"Taka porot porot apoitat (encore) ten'na tedeach vellar ghoddun gavpachi taka
kopxi asli. Fuddem porot porot apoilear magir to ek lhan 'speech'."
When Fausto says "kopxi" I take it to mean "ability." True,
earlier in his career, Boyer would rattle off couple of lines "extempore" for
an encore. He later composed additional verses as he knew that he was be
recalled not once, twice but, at times, thrice. As Fausto rights mentions,
Boyer would then plead with the audience not to call him back.
Since Boyer sang new verses the audience made a habit to call him again and
again. It set a trend. Calling a singer back once was, in my opinion, okay but
when it went on for two or three times it became intolerable. However greatly
talented Boyer was it is nay impossible to string perfectly-rhymed verses of at
least four to six lines "on-the-spot." And, mind you, not just one verse but,
at least, two or three verses.
Boyer himself admited in one of Bastani meetings that it was getting to be a
nuisance. We you knew him well, joked about it. But none of us few "tiatr
reviewers" wanted to let it be known out in public. Therefore, the myth was
perpetuated.
The book, 100 Years of Konkani Tiatr", compiled by Wilson Mazarello (Wilmix),
and published under the auspices of the Directorate of Art & Culture, mentions
how his surname "Augiar" became "Boyer". Boyer officially said that he took the
name from the Hollywood actor Charles Boyer.
Another version that made the rounds was that Boyer was called "beiro" (deaf)
by his school mates. It was alleged that he was hard of hearing in one ear. So,
from "beiro" to "Boyer" seemed a good transition.
Eugene
