Reading Notes: Gould's Divine Archer A
Figure 1: Illustration of the Ramayana Wikimedia
Seeing as the plot is virtually identical to the previous version of the Ramayana, I'll focus on something else this time. I find the bit where Gould directly addresses the possible origins of the "Monkeys" in his text. In short, he hypothesizes that they may in fact have been tribal people from southern India, and their characterization as monkeys came later. It might be interesting to depict the interactions between Rama's party and the monkeys where Rama does not strictly think of them as people, and the ensuing tensions. Or possibly his first interactions with talking monkeys would likely cause some shock regardless.
I was also intrigued by Rama's emotional reaction to seeing Sita's scarf. Rama is usually emotionally inert, and his calmness in dire situations is one of his greatest traits. So I wonder why Gould decided to give him a moment of vulnerability here. I'm surprised that he did it at all.
I also like how Gould glosses over Rama's assassination of Bali, as well as Bali's understandable feud with his brother. If there was one thing that I could write that might be genuinely helpful, it would be to re-frame the conflict in such a way to make Rama's characterization more consistent. Perhaps Bali was a schemer who placed himself into a situation where Sugriva was forced to "betray" him so as to force him out of the throne. Maybe during the conflict, Bali should use underhanded tactics first, leading to Rama's intervention. And Rama should be more flustered that he was forced to intervene rather than allow the fight between the brothers to resolve honorably. Also, make Bali act poorly, and be sure to show that most of the monkeys want Sugriva and not Bali, because as it is, it feels like a hole in the story where everyone breaks character to move the plot along.
I was also intrigued by Rama's emotional reaction to seeing Sita's scarf. Rama is usually emotionally inert, and his calmness in dire situations is one of his greatest traits. So I wonder why Gould decided to give him a moment of vulnerability here. I'm surprised that he did it at all.
I also like how Gould glosses over Rama's assassination of Bali, as well as Bali's understandable feud with his brother. If there was one thing that I could write that might be genuinely helpful, it would be to re-frame the conflict in such a way to make Rama's characterization more consistent. Perhaps Bali was a schemer who placed himself into a situation where Sugriva was forced to "betray" him so as to force him out of the throne. Maybe during the conflict, Bali should use underhanded tactics first, leading to Rama's intervention. And Rama should be more flustered that he was forced to intervene rather than allow the fight between the brothers to resolve honorably. Also, make Bali act poorly, and be sure to show that most of the monkeys want Sugriva and not Bali, because as it is, it feels like a hole in the story where everyone breaks character to move the plot along.
The Divine Archer by Gould
Comments
Post a Comment