A Play on Blurred Sexual Lines—Now in India
Aakash Prabhakar—who directed and acted in the Indian reimagining of Mark Bartlett’s play, Cock—speaks to Chintan Girish Modi about the complexities of adaptation, casting, identity politics, and the human discomfort with ambiguities.
A compelling poster with a brief introductory note was all it took to convince me to show up at Aakash Prabhakar’s production of Mark Bartlett’s play, Cock. I loved the premise that John—a man who has identified as gay for almost his entire life—suddenly finds himself attracted to a woman. This sexual discovery happens when John is on a break from his boyfriend of seven years. The unexpected pleasures of peno-vaginal sex make John wonder if he should stay with this woman or go back to his boyfriend.
After the Supreme Court of India read down Section 377 of the Penal Code, there seems to be a surge in the number of books and films that engage with issues faced by LGBTQ+ people. I have long been an avid consumer of these narratives, but I hadn’t yet come across a story like this for theatre.
The plot sounded particularly intriguing because bisexuality as an experience and identity remains under-represented in Indian popular culture. I wanted to check out for myself how the play had approached the subject. Did it reinforce stereotypes about bisexual people? Did it capture only the physical aspect of bisexuality, or also confront the emotional terrain that goes with it?
I was amazed to witness the intensity of the 90-minute production at Harkat Studios in Mumbai on August 7, staged without an interval. The actors made the script come alive with their passionate performances, minimal lighting, and the creative use of four wooden blocks to demarcate different spaces on stage.
The play drew me in with its philosophical exploration of the human desire to label, our discomfort with ambiguities, and a stubborn reluctance to embrace change. It also pushed me to think about pragmatic concerns such as the economics of adaptation, casting, representation, identity politics, transphobia and misogyny on stage and rehearsal spaces.
“He struggles because he does not see himself fitting into a box but the people in his life want him to pick a side. I could play John because I could understand the shades and nuances in him as a person.”
The following interview with Aakash—who played John and also directed the play—is a sincere attempt to explore some of these questions at leisure and in a bit of depth. Aakash lives in Mumbai and runs a theatre and film production company called Here and Now. He also co-wrote, directed and acted in his first feature film titled Freddie’s Piano (2020).
The Chakkar: How did you end up directing the play Cock? Did you come across the script first, or did you watch it being performed before you read it?
Aakash: I know of Mark Bartlett’s work because I have acted in another play written by him. It is titled BULL, and was directed by Glenn Hayden. I wanted to know if he had written anything else. That’s how I came across the script of Cock. I must confess that it took me a couple of readings to understand what he was trying to do and say with this play. There are many layers to it. There is a lot of complexity in the way the relationships have been written. After that, I came across an audio version of the Cock. That helped me connect with it better.
The Chakkar: There is much to love about this play. What were you particularly struck by?
Aakash: You are right in the sense that Cock is about so many things. What intrigued me the most in my earliest encounter with this play was how subversive the playwright is. It is quite common to find narratives where a straight man discovers that he is gay, and he wants to explore that further sexually and emotionally. Bartlett turns this around, and has a gay man discover that he is attracted to women and is probably bisexual. He is scared and confused about what this means because society cannot process things without labeling them first.
The Chakkar: Could you talk about the legal process involved in acquiring the rights to perform it in India? Do you have to pay a fee per show? Do you have to seek permission if you want to make some changes to the script for a particular audience or venue?
Aakash: If I, as a director, want to perform any play, I have to reach out to the playwright first. I have to send my professional biodata, some work samples, and even references—if possible—to assure the playwright that the script is in safe hands and I will do a good job. I followed this process with Cock. What happens quite often with a renowned and busy playwright like Mark Bartlett is that I end up corresponding with an agent or a manager.
We had to pay a fee upfront when we began performing this play, and we now pay 10 per cent royalty on our ticket sales per show. This is experimental work, and there is a tiny audience for this. This means that the amount the playwright gets is quite measly. Even the director and the actors hardly make any money from theatre because we do not have an ecosystem to support it. Most theatre people have day jobs to pay their bills. Living in Mumbai, there are a million things that one can do to make money. That’s not an issue. We end up devoting our evenings and weekends to theatre. We do it because we love it so much.
Now let me come to your question about tweaking the script. I don’t like doing that. I derive a lot of pleasure in trying to do it the way it was written by the playwright. I believe that changing a few references here and there, and throwing in some words in the local language, does not add much to a play. It can look quite forced. If one wants to adapt it culturally and linguistically, one needs to have the luxury of time and resources. One needs translators.
The Chakkar: Apart from directing Cock, you act in it too. How would you describe the process of playing John? What kind of life experiences did you draw from for this character?
Aakash: I am not a fan of drawing from personal experiences. When I play a part, I like to fall back on my training at theatre school, and draw from the techniques and tools I learnt. Tomorrow, if I am asked to play a psychopath or a paedophile, and I end up saying yes, I would not have any life experiences to recall because I am neither a psychopath nor a paedophile. My job as an actor is to be empathetic to whatever character I choose to play.
Speaking of John, what I can relate to is his indecisiveness. He finds it difficult to make choices when he is under pressure, especially when other people’s lives are at stake. I am a lot like that. What I do not relate to is his anxiety about his sexual orientation. He struggles because he does not see himself fitting into a box but the people in his life want him to pick a side. I could play John because I could understand the shades and nuances in him as a person.
The Chakkar: How did you balance direction and acting? Did you feel like it was too much?
“When I am casting for a part, my top priority is to check whether the actor has what it takes to portray the core emotion that the character needs to evoke in the audience. I do not ask actors about their sexual preference when we talk about the possibility of working together.”
Aakash: I have been doing this whole balancing act for about six to seven years now. If I remember well, this started with Crumpled (2016), a play I wrote, directed and acted in. Balancing direction and acting used to be challenging earlier but I did not give up. It seems a little more doable for me when there are anywhere between two to four actors on stage, and I am one of them. Anything more than that number gets difficult. It helps to have actors who understand a bit of stage design, writing and direction so that we can devise things together.
The Chakkar: Tell us about your casting choices: Shivam Khanna who plays M, Nitya Mathur who plays W, and Nikhil Kedia who plays F. Why did you approach these people in particular? What kind of collective preparation went into creating this play?
Aakash: When I work on a play, I have to budget for time and money. The first thing is to get actors who are well-trained so that we are making the best possible use of the limited time we have. Typically, we have only 30 days to rehearse before the first show of a new play. Having gone to theatre school myself, I really value the role that training plays in shaping an actor. The next thing is to make sure that I am working with people who are open-minded, who do not judge the characters they are playing. This means that I end up working with my friends. There is a comfort level that helps us get started as soon as we plunge in. Shivam, Nitya and Nikhil are talented and diligent actors.
We read the play over and over again to make sense of it. We also spent a lot of time thinking about the back stories of characters to make them our own. Some aspects of their lives are fleshed out in the play; other aspects are merely hinted at. We had questions about them that the playwright does not answer, so we had to imagine.
The Chakkar: When you got Shivam, who identifies as straight, to play a gay man, were you concerned about the critique that might come your way for not casting a gay actor?
Aakash: When I am casting for a part, my top priority is to check whether the actor has what it takes to portray the core emotion that the character needs to evoke in the audience. I do not ask actors about their sexual preference when we talk about the possibility of working together. Prying into someone’s personal life would be uncool and unprofessional, I think, but I might be wrong. If someone happens to be in the closet, I would not want to force them to come out to me and others. As a director, it is really important to me to have a rehearsal room that feels safe. Having said this, I make sure that I do not stereotype or caricaturize any character that any actor plays in any of my plays. I have been and I will be conscious about it.
The Chakkar: Since all the people in your team—cast and crew—identify as straight, how do you know whether your gay and bisexual characters are stereotypes or not?
Aakash: All of us are fortunate enough to be part of inclusive circles. I, for instance, have friends who identify themselves as gay or queer, and I have worked with queer actors and directors in the past. Spending time with them, observing them, and listening to them, has helped me understand them better. My idea of stereotypes is based on those interactions. I know, for example, that not all gay men wear floral shirts or speak in a womanly voice. That is a stereotype often seen in Indian films. I make an effort not to reinforce those stereotypes.
The Chakkar: It is new but not unusual for theatre groups in India to circulate calls for actors that encourage LGBTQ+ people to audition. What do you think of this practice?
Aakash: I totally get where this question is coming from. I want to do this but I have to be prudent with my time, and the money that I invest. I am not supported by any organization that helps me do this better. If I had the resources, I would have put out a big open call for actors from all over to come and read for these parts, and I would welcome LGBTQ+ actors. Since I do not have the resources, I cast people I trust to do a good job with all their heart.
The Chakkar: M uses transphobic and misogynistic language in the play. Were you not concerned about triggering or traumatizing your audiences with some of the dialogue?
Aakash: While I have not written the play, I certainly care about how different audiences are receiving it. I haven’t had a trans person in the audience who has pointed this out yet, and I would be really curious to see how a trans person would react to something like this in the play. The transphobic words used by M in his conversations with John are said in their bedroom. In real life, people do use slang that is offensive in their private spaces. If we see this in the context of the play, M uses transphobic slang out of sheer hurt and anger once he realizes that his boyfriend of over seven years has cheated on him. This is not a monologue.
The Chakkar: How comfortable were you, Shivam and Nitya with performing sexual intimacy on stage? After the #MeToo movement, theatre groups seem more conscious about setting boundaries and respecting them. Have you thought about this? Even if you work with friends, sexual harassment at the workplace is an important concern.
Aakash: We have spoken about this at length within the team. Even if we are friends, we cannot take each other for granted. We have to respect each other’s space. Performing intimacy requires physical and mental preparation, so we talk things out. If someone is not in that zone during a rehearsal, it is important for others to know so that they can be supportive.
***
Chintan Girish Modi is a Mumbai-based writer, journalist and educator. He has an M.Phil. in English Language Education, and has worked with the UNESCO Mahatma Gandhi Institute of Education for Peace and Sustainable Development, the Kabir Project, and the Hri Institute for Southasian Research and Exchange. His writing has appeared in Bent Book: A Queerish Anthology, Fearless Love, Clear Hold Build, Borderlines Volume 1, and more. He tweets @chintanwriting and can also be reached at chintan.writing@gmail.com.
