Editor,
I am writing as someone who was part of the first edition of the Arunachal Rang Mahotsav (ARM), to share a perspective that many in the theatre community quietly hold but few voice publicly.
Theatre in Arunachal is growing slowly, and there is real excitement about a festival dedicated to this art form. Yet, my experience during the first edition revealed a gap between intent and execution. We performed four plays, each representing a different tribe, in cities like Delhi, Mumbai, Kolkata, and Guwahati. But the auditoriums were nearly empty. When we weren’t performing, we were asked to sit in the audience so the hall would not look vacant, and attendance was closely monitored. Missing a show meant explanations were expected. We went there to share our stories, yet the audience we envisioned rarely materialised.
The festival also fast-tracked its way to prominence. By the second edition, it was included in the budget session of the Legislative Assembly and granted a major fund allocation. This happened without any proper review of the first edition – no assessment of execution, audience engagement, cultural impact, or consultation with the theatre community that works year-round in Arunachal. Management feedback should have come from those who were actually being managed – the actors, technicians, and volunteers. Yet we were not asked.
Meanwhile, individuals who remained sycophantic continued to be involved, while those who raised concerns or supported victims during the first edition were sidelined. If the first edition had been conducted in Arunachal under the same conditions, the outcome could have turned violent.
Furthermore, the festival often includes individuals from unrelated fields in creative roles. As a theatre practitioner once said, “How would a beauty pageant winner feel if I walked into her event and started teaching catwalks? How would a rapper feel if I taught their show? I am a thespian, yet in this festival, people with no theatre background direct plays and assist productions.”
For a festival that had just begun, in a state where theatre culture is still forming, such fast-tracked financial support is unusual and raises a clear question: If this is not favouritism, then what is it?
As someone who pays taxes, I ask: why is public money being invested in a festival that currently serves optics and influence more than theatre? Why not first support local practitioners, train young actors, and build a genuine theatre ecosystem here? A festival earns its value only when it grows from the soil of its community – not when it is thrust into prominence without foundation.
I write this to urge policymakers and the public to critically examine how cultural funds are allocated, to ensure that theatre in Arunachal grows sustainably and genuinely, serving those who dedicate their lives to it.
A concerned thespian