History-making and writing are two important processes that do not occur simultaneously. History-making comprises events that may not always occur systematically. Even if planned, events may not unfold exactly as makers anticipate. History writing, however, happens when you get to sit down, contemplate and review the making process.

In Nepal, we are experiencing an articulate phase of history where history-making and writing are interestingly coalescing. That is to say, Nepal is in the process of assessing a new phase of history-making. I am talking about the period following the Gen Z movement on September 8-9, which almost shattered the earlier power establishment and polity, but the shattering process was not devastating. The clues of the Constitution were properly used, and an interim government led by former Chief Justice Sushila Karki was formed under the constitutional provision. It would be tautological to repeat the course of events that followed. But celebrating success is a natural process.

Nepalis also seem to lose the propensity to take pride in our achievements. We tend to bring out our angst. That is partly the result of our current upheavals and partly the negative worldview that we have been condemned to live with. In any case, we have arrived at a moment when we have begun to tackle the two almost simultaneously. We are using both moments now—the moments of actual occurrence and those of our judgment. The assessment—judging the moments from a little distance and putting down the points of findings—is the starting point of history-writing.

The moments of history-making and writing occurred in Nepal at an unprecedented pace this time around. Here, I want to allude to the interesting coalescing of the two phases of history. The Gen Z uprising carved out a certain pattern of events, but assessing it, which involves writing, has also begun. Balendra Shah was sworn in as the 4oth Prime Minister of Nepal on Friday. This is history unfolding quickly. Interestingly, the events and the assessment of a necessary condition of history-writing are also emerging. A report on the assessment of the Gen Z protests has been leaked. It is being reported over the hours, marking a step in history writing.

This is an academic subject. I could easily dwell on this with literary examples, especially by alluding to theories that position literary writing as an important moment in realising the significance of history-writing. But as a theatre-savvy person, I want to turn to the perceptions of history espoused by theatre communities around the world and, at the end, link them to the historical dramatic moment in Nepali history.

The current President of the Nepal chapter of the International Theatre Institute (ITI), theatre director and artist Kedar Shrestha, and the general secretary, Devendra Neupane, came to discuss theatre modes and methods with me last week. The context was the global celebration of the International Theatre Day on March 27. They evoked the history of ITI in Nepal, dating back to our membership of this organisation in 2000. Sunil Pokharel and I became the founding general secretary and president, respectively. I remember presenting papers at several ITI seminars held in various cities across Europe, Asia and South America.

But the difficult part was membership fees and travel. The ITI created a system to pay me for the paper and to use the same funds to cover the cost. Puskar Gurung, who became the president of Nepal ITI in 2008, somehow managed to make the payment for some time. I don’t know how the others continued the system after that. Kedar is already musing over the payment situation. Even paying the modest membership fee to such important, prestigious international organisations has become a financial challenge for the Nepal chapter. In light of this, I called Ramendu Majumdar of Bangladesh, who served as president of the world ITI for two terms, and introduced him visually to the current Nepal ITI chapter president and secretary. Ramendu looked quite relaxed after the elections in Bangladesh.

The world ITI has circulated a very eloquent message this time. I want to cite some lines that evoke the spirit of our own situation. It says we should foster the concept of the ‘coexistence of perspectives’, and theatre has that unique power. Theatre is a simple act of gathering that has unifying power. This eloquent line in the ITI circular speaks volumes about our present position in Nepal. It says, “In this simple act of gathering, a space emerges where differences can exist without being resolved, where questions are allowed to remain open, and where audiences may begin to see their world and perhaps themselves from new angles.” That is precisely what we need in Nepal, where political, social and other spaces are taking shape. A beauty is emerging. But it is vital to use this beauty in politics and allow differences to exist. Don’t worry if problems don’t resolve like magic; instead, let the unresolved questions function creatively.

I want to use this article as a message from the theatre to Prime Minister Balendra Shah, his team, Members of Parliament and others who will play important roles in shaping the new Nepal. History-makers should stop saying ‘we will speak only in the future, only we will speak, only we will prevail, obliterating all other voices.’ That is the most counterproductive authoritarian attitude. I am speaking from the point of view of the theatre. If you want to create a wonderful, creative and democratic history in Nepal, celebrate the plurality. Let the spaces speak; let different people put their ideas on important issues of the day. No productive play can be performed alone. In the theatre, even when we perform a solo play, we keep the audience in front of our eyes. The audience is always sitting in front of the performer. Your birth is creative, but your challenge is to maintain this theatrical spirit in your attitude and working style.