Shyam Benegal’s India: Alternative Images 9780367195335, 9780429264061

Citation preview

SHYAM BENEGAL’S INDIA

This book examines Shyam Benegal’s films and alternative image(s) of India in his cinema, and traces the trajectory of changing aesthetics of his cinema in the post-liberalisation era. The book engages with the challenges faced by India as a nation-state in post-colonial times. Looking at hybrid and complex narratives of films like Manthan, Junoon, Kalyug, Charandas Chor, Sooraj Ka Satvaan Ghoda, Zubeidaa and Well Done Abba, among others, it analyses how these stories and characters, adapted and derived from mythology, folktales, historical fiction and novels, are rooted in the socio-political contexts of modern India. The author explores diverse themes in Benegal’s cinema such as the loss of home and identity, women’s sexuality, and the status of dalits and Muslims in India. He also focuses on how the filmmaker expertly weaves history with myth, culture, and contemporary politics and discusses the debate around the interpretive value of film adaptations, adaptation of history and the representations of marginalised communities and liminal spaces. The book will be useful for students and researchers of film studies, cultural studies, and the humanities. It will also interest readers of Indian cinema and the social and cultural history of India. Vivek Sachdeva is a professor at the University School of Humanities and Social Sciences, Guru Gobind Singh Indraprastha University, New Delhi, India. As well as being a translator, he is the author of Fiction to Film: Ruth Prawer Jhabvala’s The Householder and Heat and Dust; he also co-edited Identities in South Asia: Conflicts and Assertions.

Vivek Sachdeva, in this comprehensive study, maps the narrative of Benegal’s cinema onto the shifting narrative of the nation, as he traces its engagement with issues of tradition and modernity and history and its adaptation, among others. Theoretically rich, engaging with questions of cinema aesthetics, as also raising political questions, this work will be relished by academics and cinema lovers alike – Simi Malhotra, Director, Centre for North East Studies and Policy Research & Professor, Department of English, Jamia Millia Islamia, New Delhi.

SHYAM BENEGAL’S INDIA Alternative Images

Vivek Sachdeva

First published 2020 by Routledge 2 Park Square, Milton Park, Abingdon, Oxon OX14 4RN and by Routledge 52 Vanderbilt Avenue, New York, NY 10017 Routledge is an imprint of the Taylor & Francis Group, an informa business © 2020 Vivek Sachdeva The right of Vivek Sachdeva to be identified as author of this work has been asserted by him in accordance with sections 77 and 78 of the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988. All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reprinted or reproduced or utilised in any form or by any electronic, mechanical, or other means, now known or hereafter invented, including photocopying and recording, or in any information storage or retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publishers. Trademark notice: Product or corporate names may be trademarks or registered trademarks, and are used only for identification and explanation without intent to infringe. British Library Cataloguing-in-Publication Data A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data A catalog record for this book has been requested ISBN: 978-0-367-19533-5 (hbk) ISBN: 978-0-429-26406-1 (ebk) Typeset in Sabon by Apex CoVantage, LLC

DEDICATED TO THE MEMORY OF MY PARENTS

CONTENTS

Acknowledgements

viii

Introduction

1

1

Assertion to empowerment: narratives of social change

28

2

Women and the nation

47

3

Political commentaries through adaptations

78

4

Adapting history

102

5

Contestations with Indian modernity

126

6

Changing mofussil spaces and new (middle) cinema

155

Bibliography Filmography Index

170 178 180

vii

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

It was my long-cherished desire to work on Shyam Benegal’s cinema. I have been thinking and reflecting on this project for many years. My ideas started to take shape more clearly after many discussions with my teachers, fellow academicians and my students in the course of my class lectures on film studies. An intellectual journey, which began alone with my grappling with ideas, acquired rich inputs from such discussions. Whatever limitations remain are solely mine. I feel that no work of any kind can ever be complete without one’s friends’ and well-wishers’ help. There were quite a few people who helped me in the present project. I take this opportunity to thank all those who were directly or indirectly part of this journey. First of all, I would like to thank my teacher and mentor Professor Rana Nayar, under whose guidance my academic journey began. He has always been a source of encouragement and a constant support, irrespective of circumstances and his busy schedule. I would like to thank Guru Gobind Singh Indraprastha University (G.G.S.I.P.) for giving me the financial grant under the Faculty Research Grant Scheme (F.R.G.S). for the project. I also thank Professor Anup Beniwal, the Dean at the time (2016), University School of Humanities and Social Sciences, GGSIP University for his support. I take this opportunity to thank Professor Simi Malhotra, Jamia Millia Islamia for her unquestioning faith in my work. There are a few friends who helped me in different ways. In the course of the project, I attended various conferences during which my fellow academics gave me critical inputs which provided clarity about my arguments. I take this opportunity to place on record the kindness shown by Dr. Vijay Devdas, who was at the University of Otago when I visited to present a paper on Shyam Benegal’s films at a conference. I would like to thank Dr. Svetlana Kurtes, University of Portsmouth, and Dr. Monika Kopytowska, University of Lodz, for giving me opportunities to share my work on Shyam Benegal at different conferences held in Poland and the U.S.A. I am extremely grateful to Dr. Romita Ray, University of Syracuse and Dr. Navtej Purewal, S.O.A.S., London, for their unstinted help. Both of them were extremely prompt and kind to send me articles and other study material whenever I required. viii

AC K N OW L E D G E M E N T S

I would also like to acknowledge the editorial teams of The Journal of Popular Culture, Brukenthalia: Romanian Cultural History Review and Refocus: The Films of Shyam Benegal, Edinburgh University Press for their co-operation in giving me the permission to reuse articles/chapters published in their journals and anthologies in this book. I thank my students as their inquisitive queries during lectures and discussions gave me a fresh perspective and on occasion prompted me to revisit my arguments. My sincere thanks to the entire editorial team of Routledge for improving my manuscript. My special thanks to Shyam Benegal for sparing some time to meet me. Interacting with him gave me an insight into the way he understands and defines his medium. He was gracious and kind to give me personal copies of two of his films which I had been unable to procure elsewhere. I express my deep sense of gratitude to Pt. Ritesh Mishra and Pts. RajanSajan Mishra for anchoring my life through rough waters. I am extremely indebted to them for not only teaching me nuances of music, which has shaped my sensibility and approach towards other art forms as well, but also many lessons of life. I am grateful to them for being there for me, irrespective of my other commitments. My special thanks to my wife, Queeny Pradhan, who has been a tremendous support throughout the project. There were moments when I felt low or extremely challenged. She has always been there to extend her support unflinchingly and show faith in my work. My special thanks to her for the critical comments and also her contribution in improving the quality of this work. Last but not least, I thank our son, Amartya, for giving us a reason to smile with his pranks and mischievous behaviour during this journey. I also thank my parents-in-law for their blessings and best wishes. Vivek Sachdeva

ix

INTRODUCTION

Since the rise of Hindutava ideology in the late 1980s, the idea of India has become a much-debated and contested category. India has undergone major social, economic and political changes. The rise of Hindutava ideology in the country gave Indians a new imagination of the nation. Such an imagination was also prompted by the economic policies of liberalisation adopted in the early 1990s, taking India away from previous socialist ideals. Since the 2000s, the state has also made attempts to become extra powerful and implement its ideology, making the ideals of democracy a contentious issue. In such times, it is crucial to engage with questions like – What is a nation? How has the idea of India as a nation changed over the period of time? What is the position of marginalised communities vis-à-vis the idea of nation? How are the ideologies of nation and nationalism contested in various forms of media from different ideological positions? What role is played by media, cinema and literature in narrating the nation? Do film narratives propagate the state ideology or give a counter discourse to state nationalist ideologies? What challenges does India have as a nation-state? How have the aesthetics and concerns of cinema changed over the period of time? With these questions in mind, this book engages with the study of representation of India and its myriad images in the cinema of Shyam Benegal. Benegal is one of the most prominent filmmakers of his time dealing with the multi-perspectives and challenges of a young nation-state. The primary reason to work on Benegal’s cinema is that he is one filmmaker whose career began in the 1970s, during the peak years of Indian New Wave, and made his last feature film in 2010. During his career, he engaged with the issues of India, narrated the narratives of a changing India and also adapted his art to reflect the changing sociocultural times. His body of cinematic works is a cultural space through which the idea of India as a nation-state is critiqued from the margins. In addition, the book also engages with the evolving aesthetics of Benegal’s cinema over time.

1

INTRODUCTION

I The idea of the nation is born through cultural narratives (including literary as well as cinematic narratives in contemporary times), which draws attention towards narrative strategies as well as the patterns of these narratives. According to Homi Bhabha, any idea of nation is marked with ambivalence, is akin to narratives of cultural significance and is like a “continuous narrative of national progress” (Bhabha 2000a: 1). In the nineteenth century, myths, poetry, realist fiction and travel writings facilitated imagining the nation. Based on the categories of self and other, the grand project of narrating the nation defines its cultural boundaries.1 Narratives as ideological enunciations also push and extend such boundaries, which makes the idea of a nation not a fixed entity, exhaustible through mythological, historical or cultural narratives. Narratives help in defining, redefining and re-imagining the idea of a nation. Nation, thus, becomes the eternal signified of cultural narratives. Through these narratives, the idea of nation evolves into a state of flux; it is ever-changing and ever-growing. The politics of inclusion and exclusion, representation and narrative discourse make narratives the sites where national identities are asserted, ideologies of nationalism are contested and the idea of nation and nationalism is either celebrated or questioned. On the one hand, cinema reflects the inherent patterns of the society which determine the patterns of narratives; on the other, cinema also influences the mind of the masses and structures their thinking pattern. In this dialectical relationship, cinema, therefore, becomes a space where filmmaker and audience(s)/citizens interact and enter into a dialogue through narratives. Indian cinema(s) is/are such a cultural space where interactions of national ideologies take place. Regional cinema(s), parallel cinema(s)2 and Hindi cinema(s)3 are replete with various cultural narratives which project different images of India. These narratives become the sites where nationalist ideologies are circulated and contested. Each cinema (read mainstream and parallel cinema), with its distinct thematic, formalistic and aesthetic qualities, propagates an image of India. Filmmakers from different schools of cinema enunciate from their individual ideological positions. While studying films in relation to questions of the nation, this study engages with negotiations between nationalist ideologies, different ideas of India and aesthetics of cinema(s). Instead of working on popular Hindi cinema (which has attained much critical attention of film scholars in India and abroad) to understand the nationalist discourse as present in Hindi films, this book focuses on the questions of India in post-colonial times through the lens of Benegal, an iconic figure of Hindi New Wave cinema. The idea of nation was born in the late eighteenth and early nineteenth centuries. The Treaty of Westphalia, the American War of Independence, the French Revolution and wars in Europe during the late eighteenth and nineteenth centuries are some of the important historical events that gave

2

INTRODUCTION

people national consciousness, although each historical event contributed to the spirit of nationalism in its unique way. Furthermore, since the invention of the printing press, publishing literature in the vernacular gave people a fulcrum to formulate their respective linguistic identity in Europe and to imagine themselves as a community. Reading newspapers and literature in the vernacular became a mass activity to bind people by means of a common thread.4 Benedict Anderson in his book Imagined Communities suggests that capitalist interest of printing press owners encouraged them to publish literature in the vernacular, which made people conscious of their linguistic identities. The role of cinema in modern times is akin to what the printing press did in Europe in former times. The cinema also facilitates imagining a nation among the viewers. As nation and nationalism are not merely political ideologies – rather these ideas are born “in the cultural system that preceded it” (Anderson 2006: 19) – the cinema of a country gives people narratives into which their nationalistic imagination can be articulated. The images circulated on the screens of cinema halls, where people converge from different parts and layers of society, have always been larger than life, both in the literal and figurative sense of the word, to capture their imaginations. In the dark cinema halls, the image of cinema influences the imagination of the masses. The narrative patterns of cinematic imagination began to foster the nationalist imagination of the masses. Watching cinema as a collective activity gave the masses a common image and imagination. A nation’s imagination flows within the undercurrents of cinematic imagery. D.W. Griffith’s film titled The Birth of a Nation made in 1915 is one of the early films through which connections between cinema and nationalistic imagery have been understood.5 Robert Wiene’s The Cabinet of Dr. Caligari, a German expressionist film of 1920, reflects the unuttered anxiety of the German nation after the First World War.6 The power of cinema was understood and exploited by both Hitler and Mussolini, who used cinema to propagate their ideology by giving glorified images of their respective nations. Fascist Mussolini, in his authoritative regime, controlled the people’s imagination by giving them an image of either glorious Roman history or the lifestyle of a contemporary bourgeoisie. The censor board was modifying films so as to cater to the Fascist agenda.7 Reaction against the control exercised by Mussolini is seen in the Italian neo-realist cinema. These filmmakers were more interested in narrating stories of the poor and the working class, their strife and challenges in the wake of a dwindling economy after the Second World War. The formalistic aspects such as the use of real-life non-professional actors and natural lighting was adding to the realism in neo-realist films. Thus, the cinematic apparatus and its narrative strategies contribute to “the agenda of writing the nation” (Bhabha 2000a: 297). Either by being subservient to the state ideology or by resisting it, cinema as a cultural institution is in a state of constant contestation with the (nation-)state. The cinematic space of representation intersects with the 3

INTRODUCTION

nation-space by disseminating an “image” of its people, their narratives and histories. The cultural and ideological signified of cinema operates within varied social, cultural and national identities making the nation a fluid, disjointed and heterogenous terrain, a space of contestation. This book studies Benegal’s negotiations with the idea of nation through his medium. Two central questions to be engaged with in this book are –1) What idea of India emerges in his cinema? and 2) How has he evolved the aesthetics of cinema while narrating the narratives of India? Cinema first appeared in the last decade of the nineteenth century with the Lumière brothers inventing a movie camera.8 Born to parents who owned a small photographic studio and a factory producing photographic plates, they became the first filmmakers in the history of cinema. The first screening of their film was held at an industrial meeting before the first public screening was given on December 28, 1895. Soon they opened their own theatres to show films, known as Cinéma. In 1911, Riccitto Canudo9 referred to cinema as the “seventh art form”.10 In India, cinema was introduced during the British rule. The Lumière brothers showcased their films in Bombay (now Mumbai) at the Watson’s Hotel, also known as Esplanade Mansion, on July 7, 1896.11 “These films were accompanied by an orchestra and attracted house-full shows. Men and women were seated separately in the audience and tickets were priced to suit all income groups” (Thoraval 2007: 1). These screenings were followed by James B. Stewart’s Vitagraph and Motophotoshop created by Ted Hughes, which were held in theatres and also in open grounds (Thoraval 2007). Soon films were introduced in Madras (now Chennai) and Calcutta (now Kolkatta). Professor Stevenson staged a screening of their films in Calcutta. It was Stevenson’s camera that Hiralal Sen12 used to shoot a movie. Hiralal Sen made Dancing Scenes from the Flowers of Persia in 1898. The spirit of nationalism echoed in silent cinema when Save Dada made the Indian newsreel called The Return of Wrangler Paranjpye to India in 1901.13 Dadasaheb Phalke released the first full-length Indian feature film titled Raja Harishchandra14 in 1913 and first talkie film, Alam Ara, was made by Ardeshir Irani in 1931. After the sound was introduced in Indian cinema, Indian films not only became talkies but also Hindi cinema and Urdu cinema and regional cinemas of India began to appear. Introducing sound to Indian cinema also imparted a distinct linguistic identity to Indian cinema. Indian cinema began to grow during the British rule in India. Developing on the ideas of Andrew Higson and Homi Bhabha, it is understood that a nation is produced by its cultural narratives. It has been argued by various scholars that cinema in India – especially Hindi cinema, by acquiring the status of pan-Indian cinema – has propagated images which have structured peoples’ imagination. The subject of the films made in the first three decades brought the cultural memory of the Indian masses to life on screen by making films on Hindu mythology, Puranic Tales, Hindu epics, history and tales rooted in Islamicate culture and Muslim history. A brief 4

INTRODUCTION

list of films is as follows: Krishan Sudma (Vishnupant Divekar 1920), Sati Tulsi Vrinda (G.V. Sane 1920), Mahabharata (Rustamji Dhotiwala 1920), Ram Janma (G.V. Sane 1920), Shakuntala (Suchet Singh 1920), Bajirao Mastani (Bhalji Pendharkar, Nanubhai Desai 1925), Alladdin and the Wonderful Lamp (B.P. Mishra 1927), Bulbule Pristan (Fatma Begum 1926), Noojehan (J.J. Madan 1923), Hatim Tai (Prafful Ghosh 1929). Watching mythological, cultural and historical narratives on screen fostered identities in the colonial Indian masses and also facilitated the process of them imagining themselves as (sub-)nation groups before India’s independence and the Partition. In addition, catering to the nationalist imagination, cinema also “provided a kind of ‘natural protection’ against the foreign film domination of the Indian market before India gained independence in 1947” (Binford 1987: 145). Going back to mythology and legends determined to a very large extent the aesthetics of early Indian cinema. The influence of Indian classical drama, Parsi theatre and, “in certain respects, [. . .] Hollywood” (Binford 1987: 146) can be seen on Hindi cinema. The young film industry fascinated and attracted the Indian masses. Along with giving narratives of nationalistic imagination, social issues were also raised in mainstream Indian cinema. Consequently, from mythological and historical narratives, the imagination was placed in the contemporary lives of ordinary people. The voice against the social evils, rising since the nineteenth century through reformists like Raja Ram Mohan Roy and others, and the progressive thought in the twentieth century, was heard in the cinema of the 1930s and 1940s. Among various films made during that period, films such as Alam Ara (Ardeshir Irani 1931), Devdas (Barua 1935), Achhut Kanya (Franz Osten 1936), Aadmi (V. Shantaram 1939), Achhut (Chandulal Shah 1939), Aurat (Mehboob Khan 1940), Neecha Nagar (Chetan Anand 1946), Najma (Mehboob Khan 1943), Bandhan (N.R. Acharya 1940) and Aag (Raj Kapoor 1948) are narratives on caste, class and love. Hindi cinema of the 1950s captured the temper of the nation during the first decade after India’s independence. The spirit of nation-building influenced the form and content of films made in thatdecade. This includes Hamara Ghar (Nanubhai Bhatt 1950), Boot Polish (Prakash Arora 1954), Jagriti (Satyen Bose 1954), Do Aankhen Barah Haath (V. Shantaram 1957), Mother India (Mehboob Khan 1957), Naya Daur (B.R. Chopra 1957), and Dhool Ka Phool (Yash Chopra 1959), and famous songs15 in some of these films set the tone of Hindi cinema, capturing the various issues being confronted by young India. The argument is that filmmakers like V. Shantaram, Chetan Anand, Bimal Roy, Raj Kapoor and Guru Dutt laid down the foundation of using cinema to perform “a social function”.16 Immediately after independence, a binary between rural and urban India was discernible in Indian cinema. The division between rural and urban spaces was not merely for the sake of segregation of two kinds of spaces per se. Their representation served thematic and ideological purposes for different filmmakers. Both the 5

INTRODUCTION

spaces became imagined spaces of one or the other facet of India. Rural India became the imaginary agrarian oases of tranquillity, peace, and calm. In the hands of nationalists, opines Ranjani Mazumdar, the rural space became a metaphor for “anti-colonial nationalism” central to the idyllic and ideal nation imagined by those who shared Gandhi’s vision of India (Majumdar xx). Contributing to the agenda of nation-building after independence, rural spaces in Indian cinema were the metaphor to project India as an agrarian country. Long shots showing billowing fields and running streams with mountains as the backdrop presented a romanticised image of Indian villages. It was a place of faith, trust, loyalty, commitment, innocence, and high moral values. Films like Naya Daur (B.R. Chopra 1957) and Mother India (Mehboob Khan 1957) portray villages as mythic spaces representing India as an agrarian nation. While some filmmakers were celebrating the young nation filled with the spirit of nation-building, there were three important filmmakers who were focusing on the challenges confronting young India. Their focus was on poverty, corruption, unemployment and social and political evils. Bimal Roy, Guru Dutt and Raj Kapoor were raising social issues through their films which also reached the masses. Their films were mainly set in cities. In contrast, cities were mired in organised crime, unemployment and declining moral values. These films were equally well received by viewers. Bimal Roy’s Do Bigha Zameen, Guru Dutt’s Pyaasa and Raj Kapoor’s Awara are all-time classics of Hindi cinema. Their films, along with the films made by Mehboob, V. Shantaram, Chetan Anand et al, can be “identified as forerunners to both the art cinema of India and the Hindi commercial cinema” (Hood 2009: 3). In the 1960s, mainstream Hindi cinema gradually began to drift towards new narrative patterns and plots were centred around romance, musical numbers and dance. While commenting on the success of popular Indian (read Hindi) cinema in giving national consciousness to the people of India, Jyotika Virdi says: Hindi cinema is unique in using the family as the primary trope to negotiate caste, class, community, and gender divisions, making for complex but decipherable hieroglyphics through which it configures the nation and constructs a nationalist imagery. Deploying an affective mode of address, Hindi cinema is an emotional register and therefore a virtual teleprompter for reading the script called ‘nation’. (7) But, over a period of time, the popular cinema got stuck with fixed narrative tropes and masala ingredients. However, the difference between mainstream cinema and parallel cinema can be understood at another level. Although there were films on social issues in mainstream cinema, narratives sometimes 6

INTRODUCTION

failed to capture the complexities of the issue and offered simplistic solutions. This trend led to the artistic decline of mainstream cinema to the extent that it began to be criticised for lack of aesthetic value. This created a huge aesthetic and ideological vacuum in Indian cinema which was subsequently filled by the New Indian Cinema. In the wake of cultural dominance of popular Hindi cinema and the nationalist imagery propagated by it, there was another kind of cinema that not only resisted the capital-centred culture of popular cinema but shied away from stereotypical images of India as represented in the popular cinema. This cinema associated with the period of the late 1960s, 1970s and 1980s is associated with the Indian New Wave or Indian New Cinema. In the 1970s, filmmakers like Mani Kaul, Ritwik Ghatak, Pattabhi Rama Reddy, Rajinder Singh Bedi, M.S. Sathyu and Basu Chatterjee produced their films. These filmmakers did not make a formal “cohesive movement with a clearly articulated” (Binford 1987: 146) agenda, but they all focused on “the ills of Indian society: poverty, social injustice; the inherent violence of social structure” (Bhaskar 2013: 19). Binford opines that these filmmakers did not come together under a common political or ideological banner, but their undeclared ideological agreement and silent consensus on the function of film-art can be seen in their common rejection of cinema as a commercial enterprise. In parallel with mainstream Hindi cinema, Indian New Wave was presenting another image of India which was not meant for mass consumption. The main target audience/viewers of this cinema were educated and politically left-oriented citizens of India. These filmmakers engaged with a “progressive leftist perspective of social issues through realist representations” (Lutgendrof as cited by Devasundaram 2016: 19). They have significantly contributed to establishing Indian cinema as artistic cinema in India and overseas through their common understanding of form, aesthetics and function of cinema in Indian society. Many of these filmmakers were influenced by the aesthetics of Italian neo-realism and French New Wave. Instead of presenting the romanticised image of (rural) India, the glorification of the golden past of the country, highly sexualised female bodies, Indian New Wave filmmakers were focusing on the challenges facing young India after independence. Their narratives were not structured along the lines of popular cinema. They exploited the communicative potential of cinema and shied away from a stereotypical portrayal of gender roles in their films. It is rather the narratives of the oppressed and marginalised which are portrayed. These films negotiated with Indian modernity and contemplated on social change through the medium of cinema. They have not exploited cinema to propagate the populist imagination of India; rather, from their respective ideological positions, their narratives are enunciated to question and critique India as a nation-state and present an alternative image of India. The purpose here is not to draw sharp binary between art cinema and commercial cinema, as that would be essentialist and reductive in nature.17 Both the cinemas 7

INTRODUCTION

articulated narratives of India within their own ideological frames and aesthetics. Indian cinema in its totality is a cultural institution in which nation is narrated and its images are disseminated vacillating in ideologies and “sliding from one enunciatory position to another” (Bhabha 2000a: 298). Before the emergence of this wave in the 1970s, it was in the 1950s and 1960s that Satyajit Ray, Mrinal Sen and Ritwik Ghatak had prepared the ground for the rise of Indian New Wave. Ray made his famous Apu trilogy in the 1950s; Mrinal Sen (whose Bhuvan Shome made in 1969 is often credited with starting the movement of parallel cinema in India) made his first film, Raat Bhore, in 1955; and Ritwik Ghatak made Ajantrik in 1958. Ritwik Ghatak is still remembered for the films he made in the 1960s such as Meghe Dhake Tara (1960), Komal Gandhar (1961) and Subarnarekha (1962). In the 1950s, he moved to the Film and Television Institute of India (F.T.I.I.), Pune, where he taught. Two of his famous students were Mani Kaul and Kumar Shahani, two important names of Indian New Wave. There were various factors responsible for the emergence of this movement in India. Through international film festivals organised in Calcutta (now Kolkata), the Indian audience was exposed to the best of European cinema, which laid the foundation for realist aesthetics in Indian cinema. There were about 150 film societies in India by the 1970s. Members of these societies could watch the best of cinema produced in Poland, Italy, Hungry, Russia, France and Japan.18 In 1971, the Indian government, due to certain diplomatic and political reasons, did not renew the five-year contract for the importation of Hollywood films (Prasad 1998: 190). The exposure that Indian audiences achieved helped to change the “tastes” of Indian audiences as they watched aesthetically different cinema from that being produced in India itself. In addition to the various film societies established since 1943 in Bombay and Satyajit Ray’s film society established in Calcutta in 1947, the Film Training Institute of India was established in Pune in 1961. Its purpose was to train the young talent of India in various departments of filmmaking including direction and acting which started introducing Indian audiences to the best in world cinema. Realising its responsibility towards supporting national cinema, the Government of India established the Film Finance Corporation in 1960 with the objective of giving loans to filmmakers who did not want to make commercial films. Mrinal Sen’s Bhuvan Shome, made in 1969 and funded by the Film Finance Corporation (F.F.C.), was a successful film. In the same year, Mani Kaul’s Uski Roti and Basu Chatterjee’s Sara Akash were also made. It was therefore 1969 which marked the beginning of the New Wave in India when three films “considered the emblematic triad of the budding Indian ‘New Wave’” (Thoraval 2007: 143) were made. The foundation for the policy was laid down in 1964 by Indira Gandhi as the Minister of Information and Broadcasting. Aruna Vasudev opines that even though the government policies were giving loans to filmmakers like Satyajit Ray, who wanted to work outside the institution of commercial cinema, 8

INTRODUCTION

such initiatives could not result in an aesthetic revolution in India. “The conditions for such a momentum emerged in the late sixties, mainly in the form of small, politicized audience, the arrival of new directors and actors from the Film Institute, and the rise of re-invigorated Congress socialism” (Prasad 1998: 188). Another important factor and an agreeable coincidence was the availability of foreign film theatres. The industry had been exerting pressure and demanding that foreign film theatres should be made available for screenings of Indian films. Consequently, the ground was almost set by the early 1970s for the new cinema to flourish. In addition to the above-mentioned factors, the political atmosphere of the country in the early 1970s also prepared Indian audiences, which had been exposed to world cinema as well as the cinema of Satyajit Ray, Mrinal Sen and Ritwik Ghatak, to accept the Indian New Wave. The emergence of Naxalism19 and the rising voice of the Dalit in the early 1970s prepared Indian audiences to appreciate cinema which served a strong ideological function and worked towards social change. “The excitement that Satyajit Ray had created in 1956 had spread far and wide. The rise of Benegal had its symbolic meaning. Dissent had reached firm commercial footing” (Barnouw and Krishnaswamy 1980: 267). The practitioners of the Indian New Wave looked away from melodramatic narrative style and representation of the female body for male consumption in cinema and focused on the social and political issues of the country. Whether these films were set in rural India or in urban India, the intention of the filmmaker was to represent the social reality of India through cinema. The “developmental aesthetics”20 of the New Wave in India has blended politics with aesthetics without much melodrama or even propaganda. Unlike mainstream cinema, which maintains the status quo, filmmakers of the New Wave believed in disturbing the silence, questioning the existing social and political order, and raising questions about the nation by giving narratives about the Dalit, women and other marginalised groups of India. In the late 1960s and 1970s, it became a wave and earned a niche for itself, which is known by various names such as the aforementioned Indian New Wave, Parallel Cinema or Alternate Cinema or New Cinema. Each term signifies one or other aspect of the movement. This school of cinema is the “mainspring of a renewal of aesthetics and vitality of themes in Indian cinema” (Thoraval 2007: 138). Alternate cinema signifies two critical phenomena. The first is that this school of cinema is an alternate to Hindi mainstream cinema which has been generally understood to mean popular “Indian” cinema. The point is that the aesthetics of this cinema give the audience of India an alternative image of India in regional languages. Although Hindi commercial cinema is one of the largest film industries in the world, qualifying Hindi cinema as pan-Indian cinema in such a country, with its vast linguistic and cultural diversity, is problematic. As it was in world cinema, so in the history of “Indian cinema” too, when Indian cinema graduated from the silent era to that of the talkies, 9

INTRODUCTION

the question of the language of cinema became a crucial point. The introduction of “talkies” “has to divide nation from nations as well as conquer individual hearts,” says Walter Murch in the Foreword of Michel Chion’s book titled Audio-Vision. The use of language (verbal language) changed the nature of cinema. From a purely visual medium, it became an audiovisual medium. The first and foremost impact of the use of verbal language through sound in cinema was that people started perceiving the image of cinema through the language used in the film. In the wake of the linguistic diversity of India, the choice of language became a highly critical issue. The use of Hindi language further facilitated imagining Hindi as the national language. In the history of India, misconstrued polarisation and communalisation of languages had already resulted in simplistic connections between language and religious communities. Even though throughout the 1960s, the early years of “Indian” cinema, both Hindi and Urdu films were made (as their scripts were also written in Urdu) and there is a good number of films showing the Islamicate culture in mainstream cinema, Hindi attained centre stage status in the popular imagination. In such a context, alternate cinema(s) opened up in India to various regional languages of India. Practitioners of this cinematic movement belonged to different regions of India, which resulted in the growth of “Indian” cinema in regional languages. Buddhadeb Dasgupta and Goutam Ghose were from Bengal; Addor Gopalakrishnan, G. Aravindan and John Abraham were from Kerala; M.S. Sathyu, Girish Karnad and B.V. Karanth were from Karnaka; B. Mahendra and K. Hariharan were from Andhra Pradesh. This school of cinema resulted in the birth of another stream of films in India in the respective regional language of the filmmaker. Since these filmmakers were more interested in portraying social issues specific to their regions or states, the use of the regional language was a critical, judicious decision on their part, designed to reflect the local/regional social reality through the medium of film. The second connotation of “alternate” cinema is rooted in the simplistic binary view of crass mainstream commercial Hindi cinema in contrast to artistic cinema made in regional languages. As the nature of mainstream cinema was changing, song and dance were no longer serving a function in the narrative as they had in the preceding decade. Song contributed principally in the promotion of regional locations. The beauty and landscape of tourist locations such as Kashmir and Darjeeling in India and overseas cities such as Paris and Tokyo were used as spectacle rather than for exploration of those locations’ social reality.21 Song used to be part of the narrative in the films of Bimal Roy, Guru Dutt and Raj Kapoor (the forerunners of art cinema of India, as described by Hood) in the 1950s, which “appealed to the popular tastes and values, yet at the same time were intelligent in substance and representation” (Hood 2009: 3). The alternative Indian cinema, “whose films have a much greater respect for the intelligence of an audience and whose directors have a more widely developed aesthetic sense” (Hood 2009: 4), reflects a strong bias 10

INTRODUCTION

against the commercial Hindi cinema. Yves Thoraval is of the opinion that in the commercial Hindi cinema of the 1960s and 1970s there is “total absence of ‘roots’- not to speak of aesthetic vacuum” (Thoraval 2007: 138), which also resulted in the formation of the binary views of commercial and artistic cinema in people’s and film scholars’ imaginations. He is of the opinion that it was because of the lack of aesthetic substance in commercial cinema that Girish Karnad and M.S. Sathyu decided to return to Karnatka. They might otherwise have had a brilliant career in Bombay (now Mumbai). Parallel Cinema, on the other hand, does not suggest a sharp binary view between mainstream cinema and “artistic” cinema. It rather suggests a simultaneous existence of two different schools of filmmaking, without judging one against the other. Parallel cinema signifies a school of filmmaking focused on social issues with different aesthetic treatments but existing in parallel to mainstream cinema. If commercial cinema was thriving on film stars, big budgets, box office success and masala ingredients; the other school of filmmaking existing alongside it offered people another cinematic experience. Most of the films of parallel cinema were sponsored by the National Film Development Corporation (N.F.D.C.). Due to state intervention and support, the filmmakers did not have to raise funds from private sources which saved them from the pressures of making commercially successful films. They had the freedom to express their artistic vision through cinema. This kind of cinema in the 1970s existed in parallel to mainstream cinema, which was, at that time, dominated by the stardom of Amitabh Bachchan. The third important title used for the movement is Indian New Wave. The term is rooted in the New Wave movement in world cinema.22 The term was used by filmmakers and film theorists in the 1950s and cinephiles who were contributing to Cahier du Cinéma23. They wanted to move away from the influence of literature and the dominance of verbal language in cinema. Exploring creative potentialities of cinema, filmmakers of the New Wave experimented with the form and language of cinema. Francois Truffaut, Jean-Luc Godard and Claude Chabrol were the famous names associated with the magazine and the movement. Cinema for these filmmakers was a medium to express the individuality of the filmmaker and their ideas, however vague or abstract they may be. This movement contributed to ascribing authorship to films, which is known as Auteur Theory. French New Wave, as a movement of cinema, was influenced by Italian neo-realism. Both cinematic movements were major influences on Indian New Cinema or Indian New Wave. The aesthetics of these films were not purely formalistic. This cinema targeted the “educated, middle-class, urban viewership. The parallel wave was decidedly not monolithic and was textured with varying gradations” (Sundaram 2010: 19). By moving away from the narrative patterns of mainstream cinema, these filmmakers exploited the symbiotic relationship between form and content, aesthetics and politics, and art and ideology to 11

INTRODUCTION

its utmost. These filmmakers did not believe in the Kantian cult of “purposiveness without purpose”; rather their cinema was serving a purpose. The last scene of Benegal’s Ankur in which a boy picks up a stone and throws it at the window of the feudal lord’s house became a metaphor of protest and revolution. The mobilisation of women in Ketan Mehta’s Mirch Masala (1987) is inspiring women from all levels of society to stand together against the sexual exploitation of women in a male-dominated society. Not all filmmakers were making overtly political statements via their films. M.S. Sathyu’s Garam Hawa (1973) raised the question of “home” for the Muslim in post-independence India, who has witnessed Hindu-Muslim riots at the time of the Partition. P. Reddy’s Samskara (1970), an adaptation of U.R. Ananthmurthy’s novel, is a part of the new cinema. The “New Wave films were extremely diverse, and ranged from realist portrayals of contemporary Indian reality, especially the reality of small town and village to experimental and modernist work that foregrounded abstraction and stylization” (Bhaskar 2013: 20). Indian New Wave gave the audience an alternative “image” of India through aesthetically and ideologically charged cinema. Through its counter narratives of nation, Indian New Wave continually challenged the dominating imagination of mainstream cinema to “disturb those ideological manoeuvres through which ‘imagined communities’ are given essentialist identities” (Bhabha 2000a: 300). The ideological moorings and aesthetic conceptualisation of these filmmakers gave alternative narratives of the nation, thus highlighting the need to understand the relationship between aesthetics and ideology.

II The term ‘aesthetics’ was coined by Alexander Baumgarten in the eighteenth century and “means more precisely the science of sensation or feeling” (Hegel 2004: 3), but the discourse of art did not start with Baumgarten. Philosophical questions about art and life, through their ideas about art and the function they ascribed to art, the realm of aesthetics also includes within its horizons the debate between “things and thoughts, sensation and ideas, that which is bound up with our creaturely life as opposed to that which conducts some shadowy existence in the recesses of the mind” (Eagleton 1990: 13). In the journey of the aesthetic from being “autonomous” serving “purpose without purposiveness” in Kantian terms to Adorno’s “social function” and becoming a commodity in a post-liberalisation consumerist society, the definition of aesthetics has undergone various stages and crossed numerous milestones. Benegal began his career with realism and has reinvented his art in the age of liberalisation. Throughout his career, his cinema has been serving a social function even while he was experimenting with different modes of storytelling, which makes it relevant to discuss the debate between Lukács and Brecht around realism. 12

INTRODUCTION

Realism as a movement in art emerged in the nineteenth century. Realism in the nineteenth century laid more emphasis on “the ‘real’ world as against the characteristic presentation of the world in romance and myth” (Williams 1978: 2) with an emphasis against theatricality and more emphasis on man and the social world. In France, especially in painting, realism meant rejection of romanticism. If the French Revolution of 1789 is one of the important factors that gave birth to Romanticism in Europe, the Revolution of 1848 did so for Realism. As an aesthetic movement, it strongly rejected the portrayal of heightened emotionalism in art, and represented contemporary situations focusing on people and their circumstances. Changes in the social structure, problems of different classes with an emphasis on the working class and honest portrayals of people’s situations were the main tenets of the art movement. From Gustav Courbet’s or Jean-François’s paintings to novels and drama, realism manifested itself in different art forms in the nineteenth century. Realism in paintings and literature took art away from the domain of fantasy and romance. The realist work portrays the ordinary and the everyday experiences of people. It focuses more on the day-to-day lifestyle and challenges of the working class, peasantry and the poor. As proposed by the famous painter Gustave Courbet, realism propounds objectivity. In the twentieth century, realism “exhibits a protean stylistic and ideological approach” (Malpas 1997: 7) as in the U.S.S.R. it manifests itself as “socialist realism”.24 A much-discussed and debated category, realism in cinema is generally understood in relation to a particular style of filmmaking mastered by Jean Renoir, Orson Welles, de Sicca, and Roberto Rossellini. Use of deep-focus, long shots, non-theatrical styles of acting and composition, using camera instead of editing to follow the action are some of its important features. Besides, Italian neo-realists preferred to use real-life actors over professional actors to add authenticity. The use of natural light over artificial lighting was another important aspect of the movement. French New Wave filmmakers, who were influenced by Italian neo-realism, intended to explore potentialities of cinema as a medium to take cinema away from the influence of literature. Realism in cinema has been theorised through the ontological study of the photographic image too. Bazin’s understanding was that the photographic image “puts us directly into the presence of the object” (ThomsonJones 2008: 31). The cinematic image may not be suffering from what Bazin calls the “mummy complex” (Bazin 1999: 195)25 which, according to Bazin, painting and photography suffers from. Technology freed painting from the burden of creating likeness of reality. The movement flourished in France in the 1950s. Most of the ideas about the aesthetics of the movement were expressed by filmmakers and theorists in the form of their contributions to cahiers du cinema. Francois Truffaut, Jean-Luc Godard and Claude Chabrol were among the main exponents of the movement. These filmmakers made films on their immediate social and political themes while experimenting 13

INTRODUCTION

with visual compositions, editing, long shots and other aspects of film language. Having said that, it is important to understand that merely by virtue of recording real objects and actors, cinema does not become realistic. Realism in cinema cannot be reduced only to its form, which becomes the case of “aesthetic realism”. MacCabe, while discussing realism, is aware of the challenges while discussing realism cinema as the “notion of the real is, however, I wish to suggest, a notion which I tied to a particular type of literary production – the nineteenth-century realist novel” (MacCabe 1985: 34), in which MacCabe finds a hierarchy of knowledge. Realism is not understood as linear or a literal representation of reality, but in terms of hierarchy between discourse of the text and an empirical truth, stated with the help of a meta-language.26 “That narrative of events – the knowledge which the film provides of how things really are – is the metalanguage in which we talk of the various characteristics in the film” (MacCabe 1985: 38). Madhav Prasad discusses two modes of realism in cinema – namely, Italian neo-realism, which he calls nationalist realism and Hollywood realism, which according to Prasad, “arises in the context of a desacralized social order where the free individual is the elementary unit” (Prasad 2010: 62). He places the realism of Indian New Wave in the first category. Using the ideas of MacCabe, Madhav Prasad, however, problematises the narrow definition of realism with one particular style of filmmaking. “Every representation of reality is not a realist representation. Realism is thus not so much a matter of the object of representation but a mode of textual organization of knowledge, a hierarchical layering of discourses” (Prasad 2010: 58). Realism in cinema is neither “simple objectivism” (Aitken 2017: 7), nor is it a mechanical reproduction of reality with the help of a tool. In Lukács’s views, realism in cinema is not constituted by showing the real physical world. The truthto-nature, according to him, is not realism in cinema.27 Realism in cinema is not achieved just by showing the contemporary setting or by showing nature coming alive. According to him, realism is about representing the historical situation in which narratives are rooted. In the aesthetics of any art form all fissures of the historical moment are drawn into it. Art becomes a medium to capture the ideologies and conflicts prevailing in the historical moment, not to disguise them.28 In the trio of man-history-art, the historical truth is not garbed by aestheticisation; rather art represents man’s historical truth of man’s situation and struggle. Lukácsian ideas lay down the foundation of the relationship between form and content of any art form with reference to realism. The Brecht-Lukács debate is central in understanding the nature and scope of realism in general and also in cinema. Brecht, on the other hand, understands the relationship between form (of an art) and realism in a different way. Bertolt Brecht, the renowned playwright, wrote under the influence of Marxism. Contrary to “aesthetic realism”, the “philosophic realism” of Brecht was based on ideas of how society and its people work. For Brecht, 14

INTRODUCTION

realism is rooted in being true to one’s social position. It uncovers complex social functions and exposes the point of view of the dominant classes in society.29 The basis of realism is found not in conforming to the form of realistic representation, but in “historical meaningfulness” within a Marxian frame. To quote Dario Villanueva, Bertolt Brecht’s originality within the Marxian theory genetic realism consists precisely in what makes him disagree with Lukács: the question of form. The German playwright blames the Hungarian philosopher for his basic lack of interest in the purely artistic aspects of realistic creation, excepting the occasions on which Lukács wants to impose the most conventional and traditional literary forms upon it, at the expense of innovative and experimental one. [. . .] In the wake of the debate around the expressionism of 1938, Brecht vehemently opposes Lukács’s normative and aesthetically conservative rigidity (1997: 34–35). The question of realism has dominated the early years of film theory and continues to assert itself in the following years “because of the constant development of technologies of mediation which also imply and indicate the mediated aspect of social reality” (Koutsourakis 2017: 123). Ian Aitken distinguishes between naïve realist theories, representational realist theory, conceptual idealism and ontological idealism.30 Despite their differences, different approaches of realism agree that “both representational realism and conceptual idealism stress that the world exists (both are therefore forms of ontological realism) but cannot be considered independently of any particular representation of it” (Aitken 2017: 8). Through the bond established between the artist and reader/viewer, realism, thus, makes understanding of social reality possible. In the trilectics of reality, representation and aesthetics, realism ceases to be a matter of form or a linear representation of reality. It is a constant negotiation between social reality and the realm of aesthetics. Ian Aitken’s understanding of realism echoes the debate between Lukács and Brecht. Koutsourakis contributes to the theory of realism, as debated by Lukács and Brecht, by citing three different aspects of realism. To quote: Furthermore, both considered realism as a practice which is: 1. Inextricably linked with the dialectical method; 2. In direct opposition to naturalism and psychologically defined characters; 3. and against the orthodoxy of socialist realism. Another crucial matter to point out is that their interpretation of realism predicated on Friedrich Engles’ definition of realism as ‘the reproduction of typical people under typical circumstances.’ (124) 15

INTRODUCTION

Both Lukács and Brecht disapproved of Naturalism but had different views on and understandings of realism in relation to its form of representation. To both the theorists, realism was not a matter of direct, or photographic representation of reality. Understanding realism merely as “the visible, verifiable details of a reality” (Tucker 2011: 3) would be called naïve or simplistic realism. Realism enters into a dialectical relationship with social reality. The dialectical understanding of realism rests on the idea that it should represent social reality with changeability, but without the orthodoxy of socialist realism, which rubs shoulders with being propagandist, as opined by Angelo Koutsourakis. Realism, instead of either becoming the mouthpiece of political ideology or unlike naïve realism, engages with social reality with its complexity. Individuals or characters in narratives negotiate with their circumstances and through their struggle, the possibility of social change is explored. Brecht is more open and free of all rigid structures while defining realism. In his understanding, realism should also resist the habitual understanding of social reality. By moving away from the form of classical realism and experimenting with form, according to Brecht, a work does not cease to be realist as long as it critically engages with social reality. The Brechtian technique of aesthetic distancing, therefore, does not make his work less realist. Formalistic experimentation then explores various artistic possibilities and enriches realism. Brecht disagreed with Lukács on his disapproval of modernism as formalism.31 The “purpose of art is to impart the sensation of things as they are perceived not as they are known. The technique is to make objects unfamiliar” (Shklovsky 1917: 2). Shklovsky’s defamiliarisation and Brechtian understanding of realism and form then stand closer to each other. By disturbing the conditioned and automatised perception even at the level of sensation, the artist tries to bring readers’/viewers’ attention to the social reality as perceived by the artist. The technique becomes a handy device to shake people out of their complacency to bring their attention to the issue. It is a “means by which we overcome appearances and arrive at deeper understanding of reality” (Ginzburg 2001: 18). Defamiliarisation, therefore, is not merely a formalistic tool or device of construction of art. It changes human perception of reality by making the perception of art complex. Defamiliarisation is the way the art helps us see the familiar or automatised reality afresh. The crux of the argument is that realism cannot be understood only as a mode of representation. Realism is critical engagement with the “historical moment” (Lukács); realism lies in the “historical thinking” (Koutsourakis) to understand “how things really are” (MacCabe). It is an attribute of the dialectical relationship between art and reality, not merely an attribute of form or mode of representation. Realism is more about engagement with the historical reality of the society through art than its form of representation. In Ginzberg’s understanding, Shklovsky’s ideas about defamiliarisation and Brechtian understanding of formalism do not divest any art form of realism, even if the modes of classical realism are 16

INTRODUCTION

not followed in the given work of art. The intention is not to say that all forms of expression can be brought under the umbrella of realism, collapsing aesthetic, ideological and formalistic difference between them, but it is to say that realism is more about engaging with the reality of the times than adhering to conventions of expression. The filmmakers of Indian New Wave, by adopting realist modes of narration marked with accentuated absence of melodrama, defamiliarised automated perceptions of audience(s) who became conditioned to a set mode of storytelling in cinema. In Shklovsky’s terms, the purpose of cinematic image is to create “a vision of the object instead of serving as a means for knowing it [. . .] the purpose is to create the vision which results from that deautomatized perception” (Shklovsky 1917: 5–6). The artistic vision and de-automatised perception not only offer an ontologically different cinematic image, but also an ideologically different understanding of reality.

III Shyam Benegal is a name associated with Indian New Wave or New Cinema32 and also with the phase of Hindi cinema in which the distinction between parallel and mainstream Bollywood cinema is becoming blurred in the post-liberalisation India. During the 1970s when Indian New Wave was at its peak, Benegal’s films were made in the mode of classical realism. The socio-historical context in which he made his early films was that of realism fulfilling the state agenda of welfare state based on progressive ideas. He gave the Indian audience narratives of the marginalised and oppressed sections of Indian society. The call of the times was to bring the marginalised sections into the mainstream. To achieve this, there was a strong critique of Indian society structured on class, caste and gender principles. His early films echo the battle cries of the Peasants’ Revolt in Andhra and the White Revolution in Gujarat33. These narratives are rooted in the phase of turmoil that took place in Indian society in order to achieve progressive goals. In the 1980s and 1990s, even while making films about rural and political subjects, Benegal had started experimenting with narrative techniques. He used selfreflexive, non-linear narrative strategies, but he continued to engage with social reality to convey the narratives of India at that time. Films made during this period, from a non-normative ideological position, question the emerging idea of nation in the wake of industrialisation, privatisation and the emergence of right-wing nationalism in the late 1980s. After 2000, there is a shift in his cinema in terms of aesthetics. Effects of liberalisation can be seen in cultural, social and political spheres in India, to which Benegal as an artist responded. The economic policies of free trade and open markets changed the social and cultural matrix of Indian society. Under the effects of liberalisation, India was “undergoing a tumultuous neoliberal restructuring characterized by a commitment to consumer 17

INTRODUCTION

capitalism, foreign multinational investments and an inexorable vicissitude in the Indian free market economy” (Devasundaram 2016: 2). A liberal economy increased the paying capacity of the middle class and upward mobility of the lower middle classes, which is linked with the rise in consumerism in India. Similar changes can be seen in Indian cinema as well. A new economy ushered in mega-budget films, which catered to the diaspora population living abroad.34 During this era, multiplexes changed the basic nature of filmviewing experiences in cinema halls. Along with multi-crore (one crore equals 10 million. Multi-crore is a term referring to mega-budget films in India) mega-budget films, Indian cinema has witnessed the emergence of “a new wave of independent cinema” (Devasundaram 2016: 1), the low-budget, offbeat cinema, since 2010. Devasundaram’s usage of “New Wave Indie discourses” (Devasundaram 2016: 5) is likely to create confusion between the Indian New Wave of the 1970s, and new cinema emerging in the twenty-first century. Indian New Wave cinemas of the 1970s was rooted in the aesthetic movement and shared an aesthetic bond with Italian neo-realism and the New Wave. Cinema emerging after India adopted an economic policy of liberalisation is a different category, known as independent cinema. Rooted in a different sociological context and with new aesthetics, these films blurred the boundaries between parallel and commercial cinema. There is no doubt that there is now another new wave in Indian cinema, but a distinction between the earlier “New Wave” and the new wave of independent cinema in the post-liberalisation era should be borne in mind while discussing these two forms of cinema. There are many people including Ashvin I. Devasund Aram and Anuradha D. Nidham who have studied the emergence of new cinema after 2010.35 Instead of calling them “New Wave Indies” (writing N and W in capitals), I propose to call this new wave of indies “New (Middle) Cinema” with aesthetics of liminality, which I shall discuss in detail in the final chapter. “New (Middle) Cinema” signifies low-budget, off-beat cinema engaging with social reality made in the new socio-political context. My reasons for using this term are that firstly, it invokes the middle cinema of the 1980s (Guneratne 2003; Devasundaram 2016), which also followed the middle path between the hard-core realism of the 1970s and entertainment, as opined by Devasundaram. Secondly, the term also signifies the middle path followed by modern filmmakers. These films give larger audiences a gripping entertaining narrative and also address social issues across different layers of society. Its ideological engagement with social and political issues may be different from that of Indian New Wave, but it does create a space in contemporary times which resist the hegemony of mega-budget Bollywood films. Its sociological, ideological and aesthetic function is new, it exists parallel to mainstream Bollywood cinema and also attracts a middle-class audience. The “New (Middle) Cinema” has new aesthetics, a new approach towards the language of cinema and deals with the new social reality in the post-liberalisation era. Hence my suggestion to call it “New (Middle) Cinema”. 18

INTRODUCTION

Along with Benegal, there were other filmmakers who have made new low-budget cinema which can also be placed in this category. These include Amu (Shonali Bose 2005), Khosla Ka Ghosla (Dibakar Bannerjee 2006) and A Wednesday (Neeraj Pandy 2008). My argument is that Benegal can be seen as the pioneer of the trend. He belongs to the category of those filmmakers such as Govind Nihalani, Ketan Mehta, Sudhir Mishra,36 and Kumar Shahani,37 who started their careers during the peak of the Indian New Wave and have continued to make films even after the decline of the movement. With his films like Hari-Bhari (2000), Zubeidaa (2001), Welcome to Sajjanpur (2008) and Well Done Abba (2009), Benegal paved the way for young filmmakers by reinventing cinema in the changing economic, cultural and political context. Zubeidaa presented Karishma Kapoor, a star of mainstream cinema, in the lead role and A.R. Rahman is credited with the film’s music.38 Two more Benegal films were comedies satirising the failure of the Nehruvian welfare state in post-liberalisation India from the socio-spatial dynamics of mofussil (semi-urban areas) towns. The liminality of these spaces corresponds to the liminality of aesthetics in his new cinema. Politically hard-hitting films with the scalding realism of the 1970s have been replaced with comedies criticising an India emerging from the effects of liberalisation. If the early cinema of the 1970s and 1980s gave open resistance to the hegemony of mainstream commercial cinema, these films subvert the domination of a capitalist consumerist society by giving the post-liberalisation audience films they can enjoy. By means of his newly invented cinema, Benegal was among those filmmakers who made cinema more acceptable among audiences whilst at the same time, engaging with social issues. Through new aesthetics, these films engaged with issues of social and political importance. There is liminality in the space of representation as well as the representation of space.39 But in both categories of cinema, Benegal’s historical thinking through the medium of films is evident. Benegal has been articulating narratives of those people who were marginalised on the basis of caste, gender and religious identities. If the “medium is the message”40 the changing aesthetics of Benegal’s cinema is an equally potent signifier to understanding the changing social and political dynamics of his cinema. His realist cinema41 of the 1970s has been understood as nationalist realism (Prasad 2010). The question that demands reflection and critical attention is what kind of relationship between film narratives, state ideology and citizen can be made with reference to films made after 1990? Is Benegal continuing with “developmental aesthetics” in the new sociopolitical context? Or is he inventing his aesthetics afresh42 to critique new ideas of an India emerging in the wake of economic policies of liberalisation and a changing political atmosphere of the country in the 1990s. Through both kinds of cinema, he has given alternative narratives of the nation and also alternative images of India. Earlier, it was through the realist aesthetics of New Wave that he had presented the marginalised India. In his latest 19

INTRODUCTION

films made after 2005, it is through the aesthetics of liminality that he has provided narratives of a less-explored India. There have been many studies about mainstream Hindi cinema and Bollywood cinema in the 2000s and 2010s by various film scholars. Some of the important works have been produced by Ravi Vasudevan, Ira Bhaskar, Ranjani Mazumdar, Jyotika Virdi, Rachel Dwyer and Rajinder Dudrah, who have studied mainstream Hindi cinema from a variety of vantage points. Madhav Prasad has produced a seminal work on the ideology of Hindi cinema to better understand its many complexions. Compared to mainstream Hindi cinema, Hindi New Wave cinema is still a less-explored area. No doubt Yves Thoraval and Hood have surveyed Indian New Wave cinema(s) produced in the various languages of India, including Hindi, but their focus is on the entire cultural institution of New Wave cinema(s), covering all major exponents of the movement. There are books on the art of Satyajit Ray, Mrinal Sen, Buddadeb Dasgupta and other Bengali filmmakers which, given Hindi filmmakers of Indian New Wave cinema have tended to be ignored, creates a gap in film studies in India so far as Hindi New Wave is concerned. This book, however, focuses on an important auteur of Hindi parallel cinema, namely Shyam Benegal. His work has already been the subject of study by Sangeeta Datta and Anuradha D. Needham. Sangeeta Datta’s research focuses on Benegal’s documentaries and TV serials (excluding his latest films made after 2005), and Anuradha D. Needham studies the question of gender and nation in her book. And yet, there would be no disagreement with the statement that a filmmaker such as Benegal invites and deserves more critical attention than he has received. Compared to the amount of work produced on the subject of understanding nation from mainstream Hindi cinema, the issue of nation from Hindi New Wave is still a less-explored area. This book is a contribution to closing the gap by focusing solely on the films of Benegal in their entirety in order to understand the complexities of India as a nation in post-colonial times. Shyam Benegal was born on December 14, 1934 in Tirumulgherry, the Hyderabad State of the British India at that time and Andhra Pradesh of independent India. His familial environment introduced him to cameras and filmmaking. When he was young, he was gifted a camera by his father, Sridhar B. Benegal. Guru Dutt, the eminent director of Hindi films, was one of Shyam’s uncles. His paternal grandmother and Dutt’s maternal grandmother were cousins, both nominally Konkani-speaking from a family of Chitrapur Saraswat. With the camera gifted by his father, Benegal produced his first film. He was awarded an M.A. in Economics from Nizam College, Hyderabad. It was while studying at this college that he founded the Hyderabad Film Society. The first film he screened there was Pather Panchali by Satyajit Ray. His adoration and appreciation for Satyajit Ray culminated in the form of a documentary on him. The prolific filmmaker has, since then, made approximately 45 documentaries and more than 900 ad films (commercials), 20

INTRODUCTION

TV serials and feature films. Benegal’s films have won the National Film Awards, Filmfare awards and appreciation from critics. His films have been screened at the Cannes Film Festival, the Moscow International Film Festival and the Berlin International Film Festival. In addition, Benegal was awarded the Homi Bhabha Fellowship, the Padma Shree in 1976 and the Padma Bhushan in 1991. This book is a study of Benegal’s feature films. During his career of more than 40 years, he has experimented with various narrative strategies and aesthetics of his cinema. He has witnessed India experiencing various cultural, social and political changes. In the 1970s, India was undergoing a social and political change: India as a nation-state was confronting many questions and challenges. Naxalism was a burning issue; the Dalit movement was rising; Indian feminism was gaining momentum and politically, India witnessed the Emergency in 1975, which resulted in many dramatic developments in the political arena. A decade later in the late 1980s, Indian democracy witnessed a state of crisis with democracy reduced to a game of numbers with much party switching taking place. The birth of coalition governments resulted in political instability. Rajiv Gandhi’s interference in the Shah Bano case, his opening of the lock of the controversial Ram Temple, the issue of constructing a grand temple at Ayodhya, along with the broadcast of Ramayana, Mahabharata and Buniyad – TV serials on Hindu mythology and the Partition which revived the memory of that period of communal violence and migration– combined to inflate the sails of Hindutava ideology.43 In 1991, India also adopted the economic policy of liberalisation, which led to a number of changes in India’s social matrix. Rising Hindutava ideology, free trade economic policy and communal riots in Bombay, raised new questions, including that of Muslims in an India as a nation-state. From state socialism to post-liberalisation India, Benegal’s cinema narrates the complex and changing reality of India through its myriad images. Benegal’s cinema reflects India’s journey. Since the late 1970s, he has been engaging with the social, political and cultural reality of India through aesthetics which moved between different shades of realism, which resonates with Brecht’s understanding of realism (historical meaning) and form. Benegal has experimented with different narrative strategies; explored aesthetics of cinema and has not compromised with the basic attribute of his art, namely to serve a social function. From early political realism to realistic comedies in his later films, Benegal has constantly been critically looking at India from various angles. Despite the fact that most of his films were not sponsored by N.F.D.C., his art has not been subservient to market forces, or to the cult of “art for art’s sake”. His cinema can best be understood in relation to the society it represents. His films were not a part of mainstream commercial Hindi cinema, yet most of his films have reached that audience (Shyam Benegal in a personal conversation on November 12, 2018) and he has succeeded in raising social and political issues through his art. By 21

INTRODUCTION

challenging the hegemony of mainstream popular cinema, his alternative style of filmmaking also makes cinema as a cultural space more democratic and open in nature. As a filmmaker, he has contributed to Indian cinema by imparting socially relevant cinema. Whilst he did talk about social change, the change was principally conceived within the frames of democracy. Focusing only on the achievements of a nation and overlooking its failings would only result in distortions (André Béteille 2006). In order to understand India as a nation through cinematic narratives, it is crucial to look at all the different narratives in all kinds of cinemas. The dominance of mainstream popular cinema has propagated certain images of India. Its influence can be seen in the prominence of Bollywood in film studies in India and also abroad. In order to have a larger and more inclusive understanding of India through cinema, it is important to study how India has been perceived, imagined and represented by other schools of cinema. This book will contribute to this understanding. Benegal has tended to reveal the squalors of contemporary India. His cinema is not monolithic. His wide lens with a deep focus has captured the challenges India has faced since independence, August 15 1947. He has explored the different facets of India and explored the multiple dimensions of film aesthetics. In his multidimensional imagery rests myriad realities of India in changing times. Instead of presenting a romanticised image of the nation, he has looked at India as a nation from the point of view of the minorities, downtrodden and the under-privileged. The cultural and historical significance of his work lies in the fact that through his oeuvre one can also peep into issues troubling India at different periods of time. His films are set in villages, cities as well as mofussil towns. His cinema destabilises the stereotype propagated by mainstream commercial cinema. The films set in villages do not offer a romanticised image of rural India;44 and cities in his films are not represented as spaces for new opportunities, liberal ideas or modernity. Villages are spaces of caste oppression, sexual exploitation and of feudal values; but villages are also becoming spaces of resistance, identity assertions, mass mobilisation, empowerment and social change. Cities, which are popularly understood as spaces of modernity and new ideas, display continuation of patriarchy and regressive ideas in their own way. Cities, as represented in his films, make it difficult for women to survive and grow; dynamics of communal and gender identities in different cities portrayed in his films bring paradoxes in Indian modernity that continue to plague Indian society even today to the surface. At the same time, Benegal does not represent cities as spaces of moral corruption as is generally shown in various mainstream Hindi films. The rural and urban spaces are not shown as two separate reified spaces without connection. On the contrary, there is a constant connection between the rural and the urban in many of his films. The movement of someone from the city to the village is crucial for disturbing the existing order in villages. Benegal moves away from the stereotypes 22

INTRODUCTION

and explores different dimensions of rural, urban and mofussil spaces in a nuanced manner in his films. Taking narratives of films as cultural signifiers, this book makes an attempt to understand issues of India as a nation-state from the point of view of the marginalised, oppressed and “otherized” groups in India in postcolonial times. While historicising films, two kinds of “time” are considered. One is the time frame in which the narrative is set, and the other is the time period in which the film is made. Some Benegal films are set in the final colonial years, but the question addressed in those films are equally relevant even in post-colonial India. Historicisation of films in the context in which films are made and the time period in which films are set will be examined to understand the filmmaker’s historical thinking. Using textual analysis of films and placing them in the socio-historical context, this book studies various questions of India such as the Dalit; modernity in changing India; gender and India; the Muslim minority; historical bio-pics and the narrative of the nation; understanding India through literature-cinema relationships and the changing socio-cultural space of mofussil towns in post-colonial times, which demands multidisciplinary approaches. Varied aspects of India and India’s problems, challenges, the changing face of Indian reality and the changing mode of representation become the basis of different chapters. The chapter sequence does not follow film chronology but is more thematic. The first chapter studies – Ankur, Nishant and Manthan – Benegal’s first famous rural trilogy. Rooted in the history of India, these narratives offer a critique of young India from the point of the Dalit and Dalit women in particular. At its core is a critique of the nation which highlights caste-based economic and gender oppression. In the classical and scathing realism, the first two films discussed examine the oppression of the low-caste people in the feudal system, set against their resistance and empowerment. Ankur and Nishant, set in the historical context of the Peasants’ Revolt of Andhra and Manthan studies the empowerment of the low-caste against the backdrop of the White Revolution of Gujarat. Chapter 2 examines India from the point of view of women from different strata and time periods throughout India’s history. It studies the narratives of prostitutes in a small town near Hyderabad after independence; a woman finding her identity in patriarchal Indian society. It also raises the question of “home” for the “Muslim Other” in India in the context of rising Hindutava ideology from the Muslim women viewpoint through its analysis of Mandi, Bhumika, Mammo, Sardari Begum and Zubeidaa. Films discussed in this chapter look at nation from the women’s perspective across different religious identities. Another thread that binds most of these films together is performing femininity in the public sphere of a patriarchal society. Mandi, Bhumika, Sardari Begum and Zubeidaa, besides looking at India from the point of view of women, also examines the question of how a woman performing in the public space is perceived in Indian patriarchal society. By gendering the 23

INTRODUCTION

nation, this chapter critiques the ideology of nation and nationalism from the female point of view. Subsequent chapters examine those films within the frame of adaptation studies. Basing my argument on the importance of literary and cultural narratives to understand a nation, one chapter will set out to understand the relationship between literature and cinema. The focus will not be limited to a mere comparative study between them. The objective will be to analyse the Benegal’s political commentary through his adaptations. In Chapter 3, an attempt is made to understand how Benegal discusses the mythic, historic and cultural facets of India through his adaptations. The focus shall be to understand the issue of India adapted into films by Shyam Benegal. The first chapter in this category studies Charandas Chor (1975), Junoon (1978) and Kalyug (1981) and Suraj Ka Saatvan Ghoda (1992). Although there is a gap of six years between Charandas Chor and Kalyug, these films are discussed in the historical context of the Emergency of 1975–1977, which therefore brings these two films together. History is another important source which formulates national consciousness and national identity. Taking history as a narrative, Chapter 4 studies Indian history within the frame of adaptation studies. Historical films, fictional films linked with a historical event and historical biopics – films narrating the stories of historical personalities are seen as cultural reproductions of history. The chapter shall also engage with the relationship between cinematic imagery and history. Film adaptations are not taken as a primary source to find historical truth but to understand how Benegal has understood and interpreted history in his medium. This chapter studies three films: Trikal (1985), set during the final days of colonialism in and liberation of Goa and depicts the anxiety of Goan identity after liberation; The Making of the Mahatma (1996) which tells the lesser known story of Mahatma Gandhi’s time in South Africa and his journey to become “Mahatma” and Netaji Subhash Chandra Bose: The Forgotten Hero (2004), which explores the narrative of the nationalist and marginalised in the historiography of India. The final two chapters question the story of modernity with its ruptures, paradoxes and its development within two different time periods, namely before and after liberalisation. Chapter 5 in this category studies five films titled Kondura (1978), offers a critique of superstitions and religiosity; Aarohan (1983) considers the loopholes of the Land Reforms in West Bengal and tells the story of a poor sharecropper and his rights in modern India. Susman appraises the challenges faced by traditional weavers in the wake of industrialisation and the fashion industry and Antarnaad (1991) is based on the Swadhaya Movement in India – whose aim was to be more inclusive to those working in rural areas. The movement redefines some tenets of Bhakti in modern times and has also raised environmental issues; and Samar (1998) examines caste-based oppression in Madhya Pradesh. These Benegal 24

INTRODUCTION

films move away from the classical-realist mode of storytelling. Benegal has, more precisely, experimented with various narrative techniques such as the alienation effect and self-reflexion. The final chapter studies the changing patterns of mofussil towns and female subjectivity after India adopted the policy of economic liberalisation. Hari-Bhari (2000) is a story of five women of different generations. The film explores family planning and the fertility rights of women. Welcome to Sajjanpur and Well Done Abba are comedies set in post-liberalisation India and satirise the failure of Nehruvian vision at the hands of rising consumerism. In his last two films, Benegal exhibits a major shift in terms of aesthetics. Realising that it was no longer possible to make the political cinema he had made in the 1970s, he reinvents his art. From sharp and virulent political aesthetics, he transforms his art into comedies but continues to make socially relevant statements. He may have changed the form of his art, but has not ceased to engage with the social reality of India.

Notes 1 For details, refer to Homi Bhabha’s ideas on nation and narration. 2 Parallel cinema is a term originally used for a movement that started in West Bengal in the 1950s. 3 It refers to mainstream Bollywood and independent Hindi cinemas. 4 For details, see Benedict Anderson’s Imagined Communities. 5 The film has been criticised for propagating racial stereotypes as the black community in the film has been shown as unintelligent and as a sexually overactive community, continually harassing white women. 6 Siegfried Kracauer in From Caligari to Hitler: A Psychological History of German Film argues that Robert Wiene’s film The Cabinet of Dr. Caligari presents the mentality of the German people after World War I and shows how they prepare to be governed by a dictator. 7 Steven Ricci has studied censorship of cinema during Mussolini’s era in Cinema and Fascism: Italian Film and Society, 1922–1943, in addition, Roberto Guli. http://cinecensura.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/04/Film-censorship-duringFascism_Guli.pdf and others have also worked on censorship in Italy during Mussolini’s era. 8 Ever since the invention of the “magic lantern”, Etienne Jules Marey, Thomas Edison, Dickson, George Eastman, Robert W. Paul, and Emil and Max Skladnowsky worked separately towards the evolution of camera. Their contribution in this field is crucial for the invention of the movie camera. 9 Ricciotto Canudo (1877–1923) was an Italian film theorist who lived in France. He first included cinema as the Sixth Art, later changing it to the Seventh Art after including Dance. He published the avant-garde journal, Montjoie. 10 Canudo also lobbied to include Dance in the list of five arts: Architecture, Painting, Sculpture, Music and Poetry. 11 Aarefa Johari in the article published in www.Scroll.in dated June 29, 2019 laments the loss as the heritage building has been recommended for demolition. For details, visit < https://scroll.in/article/926082/as-site-of-indias-first-film-screeningfaces-demolition-in-mumbai-heritage-experts-are-dismayed?fbclid=IwAR2nDal DqEL3ppyeCcxofEJgcUid1F6Vgc2vSbgFIatGp7FMq1jGHR6_aIQ>.

25

INTRODUCTION

12 Hiralal Sen is considered to be India’s first filmmaker. He also made India’s first political documentary. Unfortunately, a fire in 1917 destroyed all of his films. 13 This has been derived from Yves Thoraval’s book titled The Cinemas of India (1896–2000). The author also mentions that Sir Raghunath Purushottam Pranajpye was an Indian mathematician who achieved the highest distinctions at the University of Cambridge. 14 There is a debate within the circle of film historians in India. One school believe Shree Pundalik directed by Dadasheb Torne alias Rama Chandra Gopal to be the first Indian film, released in 1912, a year before Dadasheb Phalke’s Raja Harishchandra. Those who disagree with this claim argue that the film’s cameraman was a Mr. Johnson, a British national and the film was sent to England for processing and thus, it cannot be claimed that it is a wholly Indian film. 15 The author contemplates songs such as “De di hamen azzadi bina khadag bina dhal”, “tu hindu banega na muslma bange” and “saathi haath barana” through which the spirit of nation-building, India as a young, secular nation and the coming to terms with the trauma of the Partition, are celebrated. 16 The term has been borrowed from Adorno. 17 Madhav Prasad while developing his argument about melodrama and realism destabilises the binaryviews of ascribing political function to art form, such as melodrama or popular forms as escapist, while realism is equated with democracy. For details, see “The Absolutist Gaze” in The Ideology of Hindi Cinema by Madhav Prasad. 18 The information has been borrowed from Yves Thoraval’s book The Cinemas of India. 19 Naxalism or the Naxalite Movement refers to the Maoist-oriented militant movement against poverty and feudal oppression. It came to the forefront in the late 1960s. The term Naxalite is derived from Naksalbari, a village in the West Bengal, which became the centre of uprising against the landlords in 1967. 20 Borrowed from Madhav Prasad’s book The Ideology of Hindi Cinema. 21 It refers to films such as Love in Simla (R.K. Nayyar 1960), Junglee (Subodh Mukherjee 1961), Kashmir Ki Kali (Shakti Samanta 1964), Professor (Lek Tandon 1962), Jab Jab Phool Khiley (Suraj Prakash 1965), Love in Tokyo (Pramod Chakravorty, 1966), An Evening in Paris (Shakti Samanta 1967), Aradhna (Shakti Samanta 1969). 22 The most popular New Wave movement in cinema is French New Wave but British, Australian, Japanese and German New Wave movements have also been highly influential. 23 Cahier du Cinéma is a famous film magazine founded by André Bazin and others in 1951. 24 Socialist realism and realism are two distinct art movements and should not be confused with each other. 25 For details, refer to From What is Cinema by Andre Bazin in Film Theory and Criticism ed. Leo Braudy, Marshall Cohen. 26 Colin MacCabe has discussed George Eliot’s Middlemarch and Pakula’s film Klute to build the argument of the relationship of dominance in discourse and meta-language in prose and film respectively. For details, see Colin MacCabe, Theoretical Essays: Film, Linguistics, Literature, Manchester University Press, 1985. 27 These ideas are based on Lukács’s essay “Towards an Aesthetics of the Cinema”, which is one of his early writings on cinema. 28 The argument is derived from Lukács’s essay “The Epic and the Novel” in The Theory of the Novel.

26

INTRODUCTION

29 Based on Brecht as discussed and cited by Dario Villanueva. For details, see Theories of Literary Realism by Dario Villanueva. 30 The debate is centred around the relationship between reality and its representation in the realm of aesthetics and is focused on two fundamental questions: Does reality exist independently of representation or does it come into being during representation? And is reality an entity in itself or does it exist at the level of mind? 31 Angelo Koutsourakis studies in detail the debate between Brecht and Lukács in the essay titled “Realism is to Think Historically: Overlapping Elements in Lukácsian and Brechtian Theories of Realism.” 32 Although in a personal conversation with the filmmaker, he says that he does not believe in any such categories. What matters more is whether the filmmaker understands the language of their medium and how a filmmaker uses it. 33 The White Revolution of India or the Operation Flood was launched in 1970. It was modelled on Anand Milk Union Limited or Amul, which was formed in 1948. 34 It should not be assumed that before this, Indian cinema had not been shown overseas. In the decade of since the trend to shoot films in foreign countries started with films like An Evening in Paris, Love in Tokyo. There were many films set in India where songshad been filmed in Switzerland toensure the film had a landscape for mass consumption. After the 1990s, a new trend emerged whereby Indian film started to cater to the sensibilities of the Indian diaspora population of the U.K., U.S.A., Australia and Canada. 35 Ashvin I. Devasundaram is not the only one to have categorise this genre as “indies”. Ashvin I. Sundarama builds on the work of Parul Khanna, Rahul Verma and others to articulate the category. 36 Sudhir Mishra had been associated with films such asJaane Bhi Do Yaaro and Mohan Joshi Haazir Ho made in the 1980s. 37 His last film, As the Crow Flies, came out in 2004 and Char Adhyay was made in 1997. 38 A.R. Rahman became the most successful and popular music director with the music he applied to films such as Roja (1992), Bombay (1995) and Rangeela (1995). 39 For details, refer to Henri Lefebvre’s ideas on the Production of Space. 40 It invokes Marshal McLuhan. 41 Benegal’s realist cinema comes very close to social realism so far as its association with the poor, marginalised and downtrodden sections of Indian society is concerned, but his style of filmmaking is not that of documentary realism in narrative films. So, while understanding Benegal’s realist aesthetics, a nuanced difference between realism, social realism and socialist realism should be kept in mind. 42 These ideas invoke Madhav Prasad’s argument about realism and the aesthetics of Indian New Wave. For details, see Ideology of Hindi Cinema. 43 Sunil Khilnani gives a detailed account of the changes happening in India and how this period also resulted in the emergence of new ideas in India. 44 There is a long tradition of imagining rural spaces in literature and cinema as a romanticised idyllic spaces. “Back to the village” had almost become a political slogan since nineteenth-century fiction and poetry. Both Mahatma Gandhi and Rabindranath Tagore had favoured village life without having any direct experience of it in their childhood, as opined by André Béteille. Hindi mainstream cinema has also portrayed an ideal view of villages in many films.

27

1 ASSERTION TO EMPOWERMENT Narratives of Social Change

There are many reasons for us, dalit women to raise our voice on this particular occasion. Given the class-caste variations of patriarchal practices and their diverse histories, it is important to think about difference and spaces, in order to construct an adequate possibility for traversal politics. We, dalit women want Hindu women and other non-dalit women to recognize that Indian female community is stratified by casteist patriarchal system. Caste system, both as hegemony and political structure works against the unity of Indian women. [. . .] We, dalit women, therefore request you to recognize that it is not just male domination but castiest patriarchy which is at force in India. We ask you to rethink. We want you to acknowledge the political importance of ‘difference,’ i.e. heterogeneity that exists among Indian female community. That you are made whereas we are mutilated. You are put on a pedestal, whereas we are thrown into fields to work day and night. You were made Satis, we were made harlots.1

Excerpts from the letter written to “sisters” by the Anveshi2 Web Editor hit the nail on its head by addressing the problem of the Dalit women. The question of the Dalit has been reasserting itself in India before India’s independence. The term Dalit literally means crushed, oppressed or scattered. It refers to untouchables or Ati Shudra who have been excluded from the four-tier Varna system in Hindu society, which is deeply entrenched in the Brahmanical order3. It “symbolizes the relatively new identity of a group of people who were earlier known as ‘untouchables’” (Kumar 2019: 1). The caste-based structuration of Indian society has systematically marginalized the untouchables for ages as they were not only untouchables, they were also ‘unseeable’, ‘unapproachable’ and ‘un-hearable’ by most castes” (Kumar 2019: 1). In a society, structured along the lines of caste, gender and class, the plight of Dalit women increases dramatically as “they are subjected to multiple, interconnected oppressions” (Kapadia 2017: 3). 28

A S S E R T I O N TO E M P OW E R M E N T

From Buddha to Guru Nanak, Kabir, Surdas, Ramanuja and other Bhakti poets, various religious leaders, political thinkers and philosophers have raised their voices against the caste-based oppression and exploitation in India. In the twentieth century, two important thinkers who debated the question of the Dalit in colonial India are Mahatma Gandhi and B.R. Ambedkar. They responded to the issue from their own subjective ideological positions. The debate between Gandhi and Ambedkar is crucial in the history of the Dalit movement in modern India. The question of the Dalit holds relevance even today as the oppression of people on the basis of caste continues to exist. Despite the constitutional measures taken in independent India, dalits are still being excluded, oppressed, denied equality and fundamental rights. In the recent past, dalits have been targeted by certain groups from the high-caste in different parts of India. They had been subject to crude and brutal violence. In October 2015, a two-year boy and his 11-month old sister were burnt alive in a village near Faridabad, Haryana and in December, 2015 a Dalit man was killed after his limbs were chopped off in Punjab, to mention only two instances from a long list.4 The presence of the idea of Brahmanical supremacy in the collective unconscious of Hindu society marginalises dalits, Adivasis and other backward castes, making the issue of identities in a post-colonial Indian context more complex. The bastions of the Hindutava ideology imagine India as a Hindu nation, which eventually makes India a nation of the uppercaste, middle-class Hindu man. Nowadays, when crime against the Dalit is increasing in India5 and various subaltern and oppressed groups are under threat,6 it becomes pertinent to review Benegal’s early films that portray Dalit assertions and empowerment of the oppressed and their resistance against the feudal patriarchal order. The “practices of representation always implicate the position from which we speak or write – the positions of enunciation”7 (Hall 1989: 704). Identity, according to Stuart Hall, is not a stable and universal entity. Identity formation and its propagation through a medium are a part of a larger discourse. Cinema as a discourse represents identity “as a ‘production’” (Hall 1989: 704), as a process not as a historical fact. The process of identity formation and propagation involves the social reality, cultural politics and history within its ambit. This also implies that identities are not eternal as the discourse of social and cultural identities can be questioned, re-imagined and revised. Benegal, “enunciating” from his ideological position, has questioned the existing social and political orders through his realist cinema in his first rural trilogy. This chapter critiques India as a nation-state and questions the oppressive feudal social structure from the point of view of the low-caste, and examines Benegal’s position while telling the narratives of resistance and empowerment in his most-celebrated first trilogy – Ankur, Nishant and Manthan. There is a popular notion that the four-tier structure of Indian/Hindu society has prevailed since ancient times, the notion which sits at the heart 29

A S S E R T I O N TO E M P OW E R M E N T

of casteism in India. According to the four-tier structure, Hindu society was divided into four varnas – Brahmin, Kshatriya, Vaishya and Shudra with each varna given a particular role to play in the society.8 This schema gives the most superior position to the Brahmins followed by the other three varnas. Another point of view states that the social structure was based on the colour of skin. “the dasa is described as physically dissimilar to the arya, particularly with reference to skin colour” (Thapar 2003: 13). The crystallisation of varnas took place around the Vedic Age9, which was a very slow process. During this period of almost five centuries, the traditional pastoral or tribal societies transformed into agrarian societies. This shift in society also brought about new social identities such as warrior-peasants or kshatriya-peasants or proto-gana-samgha, which were consciously excluded from society by Brahmanical texts.10 However, the writing down of Hindu epics such as the Ramayana and the Mahabharata, and Manusmriti had been instrumental in establishing and propagating the existing social order, which deeply implanted the patriarchal and varna structure in the collective unconscious of Indian society. Assigning each varna a fixed role to perform makes Hindu society look static. Dipankar Gupta asserts that the idea of each varna performing a specific function in society has been so deeply ingrained in the popular imagination of people that it has almost determined people’s understanding of Hindu society. Dipankar Gupta argues that Indian society has not always been operating rigidly according to the four-tier structure.11 Dual identities of famous characters such as Guru Dronacharya and Parshurama (both Brahmin-warrior), Maharishi Vishwamitra (KshatriyaRishi) and Maharishi Valmiki (Shudra-Rishi) illustrate the fluidity in the Varna system of ancient times. Dipankar Gupta builds his argument on the basis that even in medieval times, the castes such as Jats and Gujjars ruled their small territories before the emergence of the Mughals. In addition, social identities such as warrior-peasants or kshatriya-peasants demonstrate a porous social structure, as there was mobility from one group to another. The Hindu social structure was perhaps misunderstood by the British. They confused varna with Jatis; and were also not able to understand the simultaneous existence of different social orders in India. In pre-British India, the social order was a horizontal web in which communities organised along the lines of patriarchy existed side by side with matrilineal ones, as well other patriarchal orders conflicting with each other. “British rule, through the identification of Brahmanical Hinduism and Islam as the two patriarchal orders with nationwide validity, inaugurated a process of the construction of that validity” (Prasad 1998: 193–194), which resulted in the crystallisation of the existing order. The British system of codification and census further led to the crystallisation of castes in India; hence, it gradually became a highly rigid system. The gist of the argument is that under and despite the rigid four-tier structure, Hindu society had been operating in different ways. The four-tier structure, central to the Brahmanical discourse of hegemony, has left an indelible print 30

A S S E R T I O N TO E M P OW E R M E N T

on the minds of the people facilitating their acceptance of the order as the ever-prevailing social structure in India. The structure reinforces itself and has stayed in the collective unconscious of Hindu society. The existing rigid caste system in India, which is quite often confused with the varna system, has penetrated so deeply into the psyche of the Indian (or Hindu) imagination that people have almost internalised its structuring patterns without questioning it.12 The discourse has been equally internalised by the upper-caste and the low-caste. Through religious texts, the upper-caste or the twice-born have succeeded in maintaining their hegemony over the low-caste. In the feudal Indian society, the low-caste men and women have been continually exploited, oppressed and marginalised. This treatment has been based purely on their class and caste. Among the low-caste groups, the condition of the Dalit is more pitiable. The Dalit as a category in modern times is a synonym for the untouchables of the past and Harijans, as referred to by Mahatma Gandhi. In such a context, the condition of the low-caste women becomes even more pitiable as they are marginalised on the basis of both caste and gender. In an Indian patriarchal society, structured on the caste system, the low-castes and women have always been more oppressed and exploited. Ankur, Nishant and Manthan, the three films discussed in this chapter, are rooted in a very complex network of multiple contexts. There is a sociological context of feudal patriarchy, and caste structure. Simultaneously, there is the historical context of the Peasants’ Revolt in Andhra and the White Revolution in Gujarat. Furthermore, there is the historical context of India in the 1970s, the decade in which these films were made. The interaction between two time frames, namely the Historical Time Frame T1 (in which films are made) and the Narrative Time Frame T2 (time period in which a narrative is set) is crucial to understand the political dimensions of these three films. The filmmaker is looking at the history of colonial and post-colonial India from the lowest levels of society. In these films, the feudal patriarchal social order exploits and marginalises the low-caste women and peasants. Suffering and exploitation of women in these films signifies the suffering of the low-caste and poor men and women at the hands of the exploitative and oppressive feudal order. Each film offers a critique of the feudal structure prevailing in Indian society. Made against the backdrop of the Peasants’ Revolt in Andhra Pradesh, in Ankur and Nishant Benegal highlights the issue of gender and caste-based oppression and Manthan, made against the backdrop of the Operation Flood in the 1970s, is a narrative of the empowerment of the Dalit. The Narrative Time Frame (T2) of Ankur and Nishant is set within the period of the Telengana Revolt (1946–1951) According to Singha Roy, in the agrarian social structure of Andhra, there were different categories of land, a structure of ownership and workmanship such as khalsa or diwani land, pattadars, jagirs, jagirdar, shikmiders and deshmukh. The Sarf-e-khasi was the most important land as it was Nizam’s own estate. As jagirdars and deshmukhs or Doras enjoyed economic and social dominance, they could subject any one 31

A S S E R T I O N TO E M P OW E R M E N T

from the untouchables to “extra-economic coercion through the vetti system. Customarily under this system the dora could legitimately force his retainers to cultivate his land or do any job of his (the dora’s) choice free of cost as an obligation to the master” (Singha Roy 2004: 70). The Indian National Congress gave the people nationalist fervour and the members of the Communist Party of India (C.P.I.) and local organisations gave the farmers political awareness and a consciousness of being exploited.13 Consequently, they started demanding better wages and basic necessities. The nature of Andhra Mahasabha changed when Ravi Narayana Reddy joined the A.M.S. (Andhra Mahasabha). Among various demands made during the 1943 conference, there was also a demand for the abolition of vetti (forced labour) and other exploitative practices of the feudal system. In 1944, almost 100,000 farmers were present in a rally of the All India Kisan Sabha held at Vijaywada. In 1946, the conflict between peasants and the tax collector, who forcibly wanted to take the harvest, led to the murder of Komarayya, the leader of village sangham. The tax collector and his men were supported by the landlord’s bullies, or goons as they are known. The murder of Komarayya was instrumental in inciting an uprising. Soon the fire of revolt spread to nearby villages, according to Rohan D. Mathews. The conflict between the peasants and the Nizam became complicated after India attained freedom in 1947. The Nizam of Hyderabad, backed by Majlis-i-Itehad (M.I.I.), supported the idea of a free Hyderabad; whereas peasants were supporting the idea of joining the union of India. Owing to ideological differences between the Communist Party and the Congress, the alliance could not work for long. In the meantime, M.I.I. had grown stronger and had started to torture the peasants who had participated in the insurgency against the Nizam. The conflict grew in size and C.P.I. leaders formed their parallel government in a number of villages. In 1948, the Indian Army was sent to crush the violence in the region. The police of Nizam surrendered before the Indian Army and it also asked the Communist leaders to surrender. To quote Rohan D. Mathews, The armed dalams were now hiding in the forests, and large combing operations took place to hunt them down. The indigenous population in the forests protected the dalams. In one instance, the local people were forcibly evacuated to the outskirts of the forest, and the army burned down their hamlets and resorted to mass murders.14 The conflict which was initially between the peasants of Andhra and the elites of the Nizam of Hyderabad acquired a different dimension after India’s independence. In 1951, the C.P.I. formally called off the armed struggle in the region.15 The Historical Time Frame (T1) is situated in the history of India in the 1970s, the time period in which these films were made. The 1970s was a period of extreme political change and turmoil. It witnessed Indira Gandhi, the first woman Prime Minister of India, becoming powerful in the political 32

A S S E R T I O N TO E M P OW E R M E N T

sphere. Following Socialist policies, she coined the slogan of “Garibi Hatao” (eradicate poverty). India emerged diplomatically and militarily a stronger nation as India defeated Pakistan in the battle of 1971, which led to the birth of Bangladesh as an independent country. The same decade also witnessed the imposing of Emergency in 1975 and later the defeat of Indira Gandhi. However, the currents of Indian politics had begun to change in late 1969 when “Indira Gandhi split the Congress party, nationalized the banks, and set in motion the abolition of Princely order” (Guha). In the 1970s, the tide of social change can be seen rising. Among the changing socio-political order of the country, the voice of the Dalit also gained an impetus. In the early 1970s, another incident of high social, political and historical importance took place in India. The Dalit Panthers Manifesto16 issued in Bombay in 1973 made an urgent call to change the centuries-old social structure in India. To quote, all the land will have to be redistributed. Age old customs and scriptures will have to be destroyed and new ideas inculcated. [. . .] We must pay attention to the objective process of social development and make an historical analysis of the power that imprisons the Dalits and which has succeeded in making him tie his own hands.17 The date of the Dalit Panthers Manifesto coincides well with the release of Ankur (1974), the first film in the rural trilogy. Instead of offering romanticised solutions to the problems, these films captured the complexities of the issue giving men and women of the low-caste an agency of social change. In addition, in these three films, one can also chart Benegal’s changing attitude towards his mode of negotiation with social problems in rural India. Ankur ends on the note of rebellion when, in the last scene, a boy throws a stone at the window of the feudal lord’s house, clearly a metaphor of the uprising; Nishant overtly shows violence against the feudal order and Manthan illustrates the developmental agenda of the state and the empowering of the poor farmers in the village in Gujarat. It is therefore “necessary to examine each of them in some detail to trace the unique achievements” (Prasad 1998: 160) of these films in terms of their representation of the ideologies embedded in their narratives.

Ankur (The Seedling) – 1974 Ankur is based on a story written by Benegal when he was the student editor of the college magazine. Dialogues for the films were written by Satyadev Dubey, the music was composed by Vanraj Bhatia and the cinematography was provided by Govind Nihalani. The film is known for “its frank and incisive social criticism in its concern with inequity and injustice” (Hood 2009: 197). The film tells the story of Surya (Anant Nag), a young feudal lord, who after his city education, is sent by his father to look after his estate in 33

A S S E R T I O N TO E M P OW E R M E N T

the village. Their house in the village is looked after by a low-caste woman and her mute husband. Owing to his modern education, Surya toys with progressive ideas. But as he goes deeper into the village, his traditional feudal heritage surfaces. He begins to desire the low-caste woman, Lakshami (Shabana Azmi). One day, Lakshami’s husband is caught pilfering and is publicly abused which leads him to leave the village. In his absence, Lakshami enters into a relationship with Surya. But after some time, Lakshami’s husband suddenly re-appears and is excited to see his wife pregnant. The morning after his return, he walks towards his lord’s house with purposeful steps, as he is excited about his wife’s pregnancy and is keen to work in the service of the lord. However, the lord suspects that Lakshami’s husband knows the lord is responsible for the pregnancy and fears for his safety. He arranges for the husband to be beaten. Lakshami witnesses the act, confronts Surya and speaks out against him in public. Frightened, Surya shuts himself in a room. This is followed by the final scene in which a child throws a stone at Surya’s window. The narrative is structured along the binary positions of tradition and modernity; man and woman, and the high-caste and low-caste sections of Indian rural society. While becoming the principle of structure of narrative, these binary positions open up the narrative at multiple levels. The opening scene of the film shows the rural landscape of South India in montage. Lakshami is praying for a child at a local goddess’s temple. He prays desperately to bless her with a child. The camera then pans to Kishtya (Sadhu Meher), Lakshami’s husband, who offers a sacrificial coconut at the altar of the goddess. Juxtaposed with the next scene in which a few young men, including Surya, are looking at their results in a college in Hyderabad, the traditional rural world is set against that of the modern and urban. On reaching home, Surya shows no warmth towards his father’s mistress or his half-brother, who have come to visit. The sympathy he shows his mother and the cold attitude directed towards his father’s mistress suggests there is hope that he will not replicate his father’s behaviour towards women. Surya’s mother conveys his desire to study further while she serves food to Surya’s father. The patriarchal shot shows Surya’s father sitting in the middle of the frame while his wife serves from the side-lines. Surya’s father rejects the proposition. According to his father’s wishes, Surya marries and is sent to the village to look after the estate. The village for Surya is both an unknown, uncharted territory and also a new social and cultural space. He is unfamiliar with its challenges, which is symbolically shown when his car gets stuck and he is helped by the villagers to get his car out of the pothole. The dramatic irony in the scene foretells the events that would unfold in the narrative. It is during his stay in the village that Surya’s urban, educated and modern self would also encounter the new social order, and where he would stumble. Cultivating a modern outlook, he allows Lakshami to cook for him, which is not appreciated by the local people. As the narrative progresses, his traditional 34

A S S E R T I O N TO E M P OW E R M E N T

feudal masculinity begins to manifest itself in stark contrast to his progressive claims. He desires Lakshami and casts his voyeuristic gaze on her but is hesitant to express his longing. Breaking the stereotypical portrayal, the narrative explores different facets of the urban and rural subjectivities. Despite his position of authority and power, Surya is weak in Lakshami’s presence. In the power dynamics played out between Surya and Lakshami, it is Lakshami who is the more dominant force. This becomes evident in the scene in which Surya encounters a snake and like a frightened child, he calls Lakshami for help. In the interpersonal man-woman equation, Lakshami takes the driving seat by being her master’s saviour. Surya’s position is strengthened only by his social status – his high-caste and class – which Lakshami is too weak to challenge or alter. Lakshami realises women’s weakness and vulnerability in rural society in an episode about Rajamma, a woman in the village. She is aware of the fact that her relationship with the young feudal lord will not be acceptable by society, but when he reassures her that he would protect her and look after her, she submits to him. Their relationship evolves as a result of traditional feudal seniority rites where the master enjoys sexual access to subordinate women – it is not a traditional love story. Lakshami, too, in the absence of her husband, has no one to depend upon. “Theirs is a relationship more of convenience than affection” (Hood 2009: 201). The equation changes immediately after Surya’s wife, Saru (Priya Tendulkar), joins him in the village. Surya’s wife is not comfortable with Lakshami’s presence in the house and wants her to leave. Surya, on finding that Lakshami is pregnant with his child, also requires her removal as he refuses to accept the child. It is important to appreciate that Lakshami submits to Surya when she is alone and vulnerable. She is conscious of her weak status within the patriarchal society. Lakshami succumbs to the demands of patriarchy more than to an individual before her. In contrast, Surya is depicted as a weak man. He refuses to accept the child. In the Lakshami-Surya equation, he is empowered by his gender and caste. It is by virtue of these social denominators that he exercises his authority over Lakshami and takes possession of her body. However, at crucial points, Lakshami is accorded either centrality or foreground positioning within the cinematic frames in contrast to Surya. In the narrative operating between the themes of feudalism and sexual desire, Lakshami is shown to be in a commanding and dominating position vis-à-vis the young feudal lord in their interpersonal equation. She is side-lined either by the young lord’s wife (the institution of marriage) or Surya’s father (feudalism). Through the dynamics of power relations in the film, Benegal highlights the strength of the social structure and social institutions over individuals. Surya as a character stands in the intermediate domain between feudalism and modernity. All of his progressive ideas are compromised once he reaches the village. His journey back to the village can be seen as a journey back to his traditional world, which he has inherited from his father. His relationship 35

A S S E R T I O N TO E M P OW E R M E N T

with Lakshami reflects the sexual, mental and physical exploitation of the low-caste women. When Lakshami sees her husband beaten by Surya’s men, she speaks out for the first time. Benegal does not pin his hopes on the progressive ideas of urban modernity or from the privileged class for bringing about the change, rather he suggests that the change must begin from the lower classes if they are given the means to do so. A poor boy’s picking up a stone and throwing it at the window of the feudal lord’s house reverberates with the war cries of an uprising. In Ankur, Benegal has added historical and sociological frames to the narrative. It shows the plight of low-caste women in Indian rural society where the traditional feudal order privileges high-caste men. The uppercastes have used religion to maintain their hegemonic position in society to keep the low-caste perpetually subjugated and oppressed. Benegal questions the age-old social order responsible for the oppression and exploitation of the low-caste people, particularly women. The voice of protest in the film resonates with the Peasants’ Revolt in Andhra Pradesh. With the backdrop of the revolts, the film also attains political dimensions. However, Benegal does not make any overt reference to the historical events which play out in the backdrop of the narrative. The film suggests a “larger cultural-ideological project . . . within which a spectator is being invited” (Needham 2016: 20). Benegal’s political cinema in Ankur does not show violence or mass mobilisation on screen; rather it is through his cinematic devices that he makes his ideological position clear. When the boy picks up the stone to throw at the window, Benegal places the camera behind the boy, linking the camera’s gaze with that of the audience, and thus the audience views the act of protest through the eyes of the oppressed. The subsequent scene shows the entire screen turning red, which symbolizes the revolution. The use of cinema language is such that the viewer also participates in the social awakening. Benegal gives expression to the anger of the low-caste thereby challenging the power and hegemony of the high-caste. Narrative strategies employed in the film make the viewer, mostly educated, urban and high-caste, identify with the pain and suffering of the low-caste, becoming the mouth piece for an alternative voice

Nishant (Night’s End, 1975) Set in rural Andhra, Nishant is based on a short story written by Vijay Tendulkar, an eminent Marathi playwright. The dialogues were written by Satyadev Dubey; art direction was provided by Shama Zaidi, and the music was composed by Vanraj Bhatia. Taking place in 1945, the film examines the subject of sexual exploitation of women in feudal society. Anna (Amrish Puri) is the eldest brother, who is the feudal lord in the village. He and two of his younger brothers are hardcore womanisers. Visham (Naseeruddin Shah) is the youngest and married to Rukmini (Smita Patil). The film follows 36

A S S E R T I O N TO E M P OW E R M E N T

a schoolteacher (Girish Karnad) whose wife, Susheela (Shabana Azmi), is abducted and raped by Anna’s brothers who belong to the high-caste. The schoolteacher is too weak to fight them. The dramatic pathos is heightened because he does not get any help from the police or judiciary to enable his wife to be released from her abductors. The schoolteacher mobilises the villagers against them. The irate villagers attack the lord’s house and kill all the inhabitants. In the final scene, the schoolteacher is seen searching for his wife who has been trapped by the angry crowd on a hilltop. The narrative of the film has been given a larger cultural reference to the Hindu epic as the events that take place mirror those of the Ramayana. In the Ramayana, Sita, the wife of Lord Rama is abducted by Ravana. Lord Rama raises an army of vanars18 to attack Lanka, the kingdom of Ravana. After a fierce battle, all Lanka’s warriors are killed and Sita is returned to Lord Rama. Despite the superficial similarities between them, there are ideological differences between the Ramayana and Nishant which shall be discussed later. The narrative of the film operates in well-defined social categories. The village social order is based on two institutions, religion and feudalism. Anna, his brothers, and the villagers represent ideologies of submission, fatalism and the acceptance of unquestionable authority propagated by religion. The conflict in the narrative is played out between the school teacher and the feudal lord and his brothers – a conflict which symbolises the new consciousness and the old order. The film opens with a blank screen. On the sound track the chanting of morning prayer can be heard. The first scene shows a priest going to the temple after taking a bath. The wide-angle shots highlight an old temple, suggesting the old socio-religious order in the village. The amount of control the feudal lord and his brothers enjoy over the police and village is already established at this point. It begins with the theft of jewellery from the temple. Although the temple jewellery is stolen by younger brothers of the zamindar or the feudal lord,19 an innocent man is accused of the theft and beaten. In the next episode, Anna, the feudal lord asks a peasant to send his wife to his mansion. Anna and his two brothers (Anant Nag and Mohan Agashe) are prolific philanderers. They “exploit the villagers economically and sexually” (Prasad 1998: 204). Although Visham (Naseerudin Shah), the youngest brother, does not approve of their indulgence and womanising, he still keeps company with him, despite his wife’s protestations. Opening scenes of the film establish the social setting in which the entire drama takes place. The rural space is marked by the unchallenged power of the feudal lord, moral decadence and exploitation of women. As opined by Prasad, villagers have been oppressed and exploited by the feudal system, but they do not have consciousness of it. But the ideas of change are suggested by the appearance of a schoolteacher – a newcomer – who has been transferred to the village. It is the school teacher, an “external one” (Datta 2008: 81), who raises the villagers’ consciousness of the injustices levied 37

A S S E R T I O N TO E M P OW E R M E N T

towards them. He is spatially, culturally and ideologically external to the village. He has brought with him a new consciousness. The schoolteacher, “an individual sufferer” (Prasad 1998: 206), imparts the consciousness of their suffering and exploitation among them, and also becomes the agency of the revolt. The existing order is disturbed when Susheela is abducted by the brothers of the zamindar. She transgresses the implicit social code by peering out of the window when her husband talks to the feudal lord’s brothers. He gestures for her to move away from the window but she fails to understand. On another occasion, she peers over the wall to watch while a peasant is evicted. Visham takes a fancy to her. His elder brothers see an opportunity to initiate him into their ways. One night, they abduct Susheela after which, the schoolteacher approaches the police, a lawyer and the district collector for help, to no avail. The Ramayana, as a meta-narrative, provides the film with the cultural frame within which this film can be interpreted. Like Sita in the Ramayana, Susheela also has to pay the price for an act of transgression. She is abducted by the lord’s brothers at night, who easily overpower the schoolteacher. Making the conflict between the Aryans and the Rakshasas in the Ramayana as his central motif in the film, Benegal has placed it in the modern sociocultural context. However, the fundamental difference between these two narratives is that in the film, the oppressor is not an outsider, but a powerful insider. In the feudal patriarchal society, the schoolteacher, ordinary villagers and the low-caste-people constitute the “other” of the society, who are perpetually oppressed and marginalised. Sangeeta Dutta quotes Kishore Valicha: “The Ramayan is seen as contemporary because it deals with the plight of Sita whose suffering can now be viewed within a definite socio-cultural framework” (Valicha as quoted by Dutta 83). After her abduction, the highangle shot shows Susheela lying flat on the floor signifying her physically and spiritually crushed state in the house of the feudal lord. When Susheela comes around, she examines her body. The close-up shot shows that she is trying to understand precisely where she is. The sound track signifies the chanting of morning prayers. Susheela opens the door and with a sudden realisation and feeling of fear, she closes it and sits down. The following night, she is raped by two of the four brothers. When Visham goes to the room in which Susheela is being kept, she is lying on the floor like a corpse. Gradually, Susheela resigns to her fate and almost accepts her position as a sexual slave in the house. One day, she meets her husband accidently at the temple. She rebukes him for not having done anything to save her from the clutches of the feudal lord. The schoolteacher holds a discussion with the village priest which becomes the turning point in the narrative. Initially, the village priest preaches the conventional fatalist viewpoint and asks the schoolteacher to accept his fate. The schoolteacher is, however, convinced that such an abhorrent crime 38

A S S E R T I O N TO E M P OW E R M E N T

should not be tolerated and that the people should collectively stand against it. Acknowledging the important position held by the priest in society, the schoolteacher appeals to him to raise his voice and convince the villagers to join the schoolteacher in his mission to rise up against the oppression of the feudal lord. This results in the mass mobilisation of the poor in the village. Receiving the sanction and support of the priest, and being inspired by the intellectual force of the schoolteacher, the villagers stand united against the oppressive feudal lord. The message of revolt spreads very quickly and the villagers are ready to join the schoolteacher. The brewing anger is palpable as on one occasion, two of the lord’s car’s tyres are punctured and, on another occasion, not even a single member of his family is invited to a competition at the village fair. One day, the villagers gather at the temple, including the lord’s own servants who have deliberately chosen not to work on this occasion. When the lord comes out to offer prayers, the schoolteacher, standing next to the priest is unable to control his anger. He attacks the lord. The priest calls other men for help, who start hitting the feudal lord with sticks. The lord’s younger brother shoots from his mansion and the schoolteacher is wounded in his arm. The angry villagers attack the mansion killing two of his brothers. The youngest brother, Visham, escapes with Susheela, leaving his own wife behind. They are followed by angry armed villagers. They hide behind a boulder, but are surrounded by the enraged villagers. The schoolteacher, their leader, is unable to control the mob and is left behind by them. The militant peasants vent their rage on Visham and Susheela as the schoolteacher helplessly calls out his Susheela’s name. In the closing scene, with the song Piya baaj pyala piya jaye na, a boy enters the mansion. The priest is sitting next to Rukmini, Visham’s wife, who lies dead. Before leaving the house, the priest places his shawl over Rukmini’s body. The last shot is of all the young village boys and girls sitting in the temple, hoping for a better future. On the surface, there appear to be similarities between the epic and the film narrative in terms of Susheela’s transgression, her abduction, the raising of an army of the lower-caste group and the subsequent killing of the oppressor. But detailed and critical analysis presents a different view. Although Susheela does pay the price for her act of transgression and is abducted like Sita in the Ramayana, the fundamental difference in their situations is that Sita never accepted her fate whilst in Ravana’s captivity, whereas Susheela seemingly resigns herself to her fate. Ideologically, the Ramayana has played a role in establishing the Brahmanical order and patriarchy in India; whereas Nishant questions the existing social structure, which, until now, has legitimised the hegemonic position of the upper-caste. Nishant is a narrative of resistance and revolt against the oppressive forces within the society. The film narrative is structured around the class conflict; whereas the Ramayana can be seen as structured around racial conflict (between Aryans and non-Aryans). In the film, the oppressors are not from a different race, but a 39

A S S E R T I O N TO E M P OW E R M E N T

different class. In the Ramayana, the conflict is between two power centres; whereas in the film the conflict is between the powerful and the powerless – the feudal system and the oppressed peasantry. Rooted in the historical context of the Peasants’ Revolt in Andhra, Nishant is also a narrative of empowerment, resistance and revolt against feudal power. Unlike Ankur, this film does not introduce a metaphor of rebellion; rather it presents the naked spectacle of unbridled violence. What has only been suggested in Ankur overtly manifests in Nishant. Nevertheless, while making a very strong appeal for revolt against the oppressive system, the ideological position of the film does not encourage the use of violence to change the social structure. The armed uprising towards the end of the film goes astray. The peasants stop listening to their own leader. Their fury and anger overpower them. Carried away by their rage, they even attack Susheela and Rukmini, who were also victims of the system against which the villagers had stood up. The angry peasants seem to be working on a single track to kill everybody associated with the feudal lord’s house or family. The film narrative seems to be warning its audience about as to what can go wrong if a violent protest goes out of control. Benegal does make an appeal for change, but not through violent means. By criticising violence, he illustrates how he disagrees with that approach to social change and calls for change within a more democratic framework. The previous film Ankur ended on a radical note, whereas in Nishant, Benegal moves away from a radical position, irrespective of the violence which served its own purpose in the narrative. At the heart of the issue sits the conflict between the peasantry and the rich landlords who were supported by the Nizam of Hyderabad, which resonates in both the film, Ankur and Nishant. The spectacle of violence shown in Nishant was a reality because during the Peasants’ Revolt approximately 300-400 villagers stood against the oppression of the elitist landlords who regularly exploited poor farmers economically and their wives sexually. Both films examine the oppression of those who exist outside the hegemonic power structures of a feudal, patriarchal society. The battle cries of the Peasants’ Revolt in Andhra echo resolutely in both of these films.

Manthan (The Churning, 1976) Manthan, the final film to be discussed in this chapter is based on the Operation Flood of Gujarat. It tells the story of the setting up of a milk co-operative society. It is a narrative of empowerment of the low-caste people through milk co-operative societies. Acting upon Dr. Kurien’s20 suggestion, the film was also funded by the farmers of Gujarat. For a film with a budget of Rs. 20 Lakh, five lakh farmers donated two rupees each in order to sponsor the film. the objective of which was to provide funding for the making of the film itself, a milestone for the history of cinema.21 It is opined that while dealing with, “social and political issues, most New Cinema films 40

A S S E R T I O N TO E M P OW E R M E N T

tend to reveal problems rather than suggest solutions or attempt to mobilise their audience towards action” (Binford 1987: 152). Manthan, on the other hand, is a film that not only suggests the solution through the economic empowerment of farmers, but also narrates the actual incident which resulted in the empowerment of the low-caste. The success of the organising of the farmers is not only limited to the narrative in the film, nor is it merely confined to milk co-operatives. It provides another dimension as the farmers were also as the actual producers of the film. Art direction was provided by Shama Zaidi, the screenplay was written by Vijay Tendulkar and dialogues by Kaifi Azmi. Madhav Prasad interprets Manthan as an “Emergency film” which is “about the transformative power of mobilized bureaucracy” (Prasad 1998: 210) during the Emergency. The Emergency slogans and messages, which could be heard on the radio throughout the film, establish the historicpolitical context in which the film is set. The Emergency was a time which saw government offices opening on time, officials adhering to the schedule and even trains were running according to timetables. At the same time, the period of the Emergency, which allowed Indira Gandhi to rule by decree, is also known for the suspension of fundamental rights, atrocities on people, a ban on press and media, the suppression of political opposition by force and forced mass sterilisation. Despite the historical context of the Emergency, the film stands firmly rooted in the Operation Flood of the 1970s. Launched to empower farmers and to give control to farmers over resources, Operation Flood gave farmers access to modern technology and business strategies. As a result, India became self-sufficient in milk production. The conflict in the film can be seen between the traditional exploitative and oppressive structures, and the new ideas that made poor farmers self-sustainable. “It is the same clash of tradition and modernity” (Datta 2008: 88) in which the state implements its policies to change the state of poor farmers. Manohar Rao (Girish Karnad), an idealist veterinary doctor, along with his team members, travels to a village to establish a milk co-operative society. He faces challenges with multiple characters: Ganganath Mishra (Amrish Puri), the owner of the local dairy, who economically exploits the local farmers; the sarpanch or the village head (Kulbhushan Kharbanda), who is stuck in the feudal mould and plays caste politics in the village and Bhola (Naseeruddin Shah), a local low-caste man, who is an illegitimate child of an urban contractor and hates city people. Dr. Rao faces challenges from existing structures (economic, political and social), all of which endeavour to resist any change in the village. All those holding power, either because of their own vested interests or their inherent prejudice, create obstacles in the path of any proposed social change in the village. Mishra always liked to have poor illiterate farmers under his thumb so that he could increase his profit-margins by underpaying the farmers who supplied him with milk for his dairy. The sarpanch did not like to disturb the existing socio-political 41

A S S E R T I O N TO E M P OW E R M E N T

structure which empowered the high-caste in the village. Resistance from Bhola reflects the prejudice of the rural people towards the urban people which is therefore manifested in a resistance towards modernity and the new ideas coming from the cities. One of the effects of the strict measures of the Emergency was shown in the beginning of the film as the train arrived on time. “One of the well-known achievements of the Emergency was the punctual operation of the railways. [. . .] In the opening scene, this reference to the alert and responsive state also establishes the changed relationship between bureaucracy and hinterland” (Prasad 1998: 210). The villagers, who were supposed to receive the bureaucrats, do not arrive at the train station in time. When the train stops at the village railway station, Dr. Rao and his team members alight from it. To their dismay, they do not find anyone there. After a slight delay, a few men from the village arrive with garlands in their hands to welcome them. A villager says, “Maaf Kijiye, gadi time par aa gayi” or “We are sorry, the train arrived on time today,” signifying that people were otherwise used to trains running late. Ironically, in the new scenario, the bureaucrats do not make the villagers wait; rather they are waiting for the villagers. Dr. Rao, an idealist, refuses to wear the garland offered to him. Taking pity on the horse brought to transport him, he opts to walk instead of adding extra load to the horse-cart. The camera shows that Dr. Rao takes the road alone and walks to the village, symbolic of the journey he is going to make once he is in the village. He works hard to establish the milk co-operative. On the first morning, whilst his team members are asleep, Dr. Rao walks around the village alone, initiating conversation with the villagers to assess the situation. He goes from house to house to collect milk samples. He encounters Bindu (Smita Patil), who takes him for a thief as he has picked up a sample of milk without her consent. As he is surrounded by the villagers, Mishra ji comes to his rescue; but it is not long before the ideological conflict between Dr. Rao and Mishra ji surfaces. Dr. Rao and his team must be perceived in the historical context of the Emergency. He is there to carry out the state’s socialist agenda. Indira Gandhi was helped by those empowered by the Emergency which “implemented her government’s socialist programme” (Prasad 1998: 210). The difficulties that Dr. Rao faces in the film signify the difficulties faced by the state in implementing its socialist agenda. The conflicting ideologies of Dr. Rao and Mishra are shown overtly as Mishra tries to dissuade Dr. Rao from establishing the milk co-operative in the village. Mishra is complacent and believes that the farmers cannot survive in the village without his support. He goes so far as to claim that it is he who has built the region’s economy. In contrast, Dr. Rao works in the village to empower the low-caste farmers. Dr. Rao’s experiences in the village are fraught with challenges. The villagers initially are not able to trust an urban man – an outsider. However, Dr. Rao gradually succeeds in winning the confidence of the low-caste poor farmers of the village. Saving the life of a sick child, banishing Chandravarkar, 42

A S S E R T I O N TO E M P OW E R M E N T

who has impregnated a village woman, and later bailing out Bhola, helps Dr. Rao establish faith among the local people. Winning the confidence of the villagers, he starts establishing the village co-operative. He also encourages the villagers to contest the local elections. Dr. Rao’s ideas of empowering the villagers bring him into direct conflict with Mishra and the sarpanch. When a low-caste man wins the local election, the sarpanch takes it as an attack on his honour and decides to have Dr. Rao removed from the village. In the meantime, Mishra unscrupulously outwits Dr. Rao as he succeeds in getting Bindu’s signature on a blank paper accusing Dr. Rao of raping her. As a result, Dr. Rao’s is transferred back to the headquarters, which Mishra and the sarpanch see as a great success. However, by that time, Dr. Rao has succeeded in sowing the seed of change. After he leaves the village, Bhola mobilises the low-caste farmers and convinces them not to contribute milk to Mishra’s dairy. He and Bindu become instrumental in inspiring the lowcaste to keep the co-operative society alive as it is their own society. Bhola, formerly Dr. Rao’s adversary, emerges as the leader of the low-caste farmers. He becomes instrumental in starting the co-operative once again in the village. The conflict in the film is not merely between the government’s socialist agenda and the local people, but also between tradition and modernity. In the social churning, the harbinger of modernity and change is the state bureaucracy, represented by Dr. Rao, during the Emergency. Dr. Rao and his team members are outsiders, but representatives of the government. It is their concerted efforts that prepared the ground for the social change. The change that started with Ankur, and which attained the magnitude of a storm in Nishant is finally able to yield results in Manthan by empowering the low-caste farmers by making them the owners of the co-operative society. Ankur presents the seedling of change, resistance and revolt in a suggestive manner which culminates into a full-fledged anarchist rebellion in Nishant. In Manthan also one can hear the voice of protest, but it is more organised and systematic. In Manthan, the seeds were sown by an outside agency as in Nishant, but without the spectacle of violence and anarchy. In Manthan, rather, the leader is able to inspire and give vision to the low-caste people. He teaches them how to organise themselves; he empowers them politically by inspiring them to contest elections and finally, he leads them to their economic independence as well. Seen in relation with his two earlier films, Manthan strongly recommends change within the frame of the democratic system through the political and economic empowerment of the low-caste farmers. In all the three films, there is a common pattern, namely a connection between the cities and villages of India. Benegal does not offer a stereotypical romanticised image of villages. In these films, villages are the spaces of oppression, poverty and exploitation; but villages also become the space of change that Benegal, as a filmmaker, is seeking in India. Setting his films in villages does not cause problems in the relationship between villages and cities. There 43

A S S E R T I O N TO E M P OW E R M E N T

is still a constant connection between them, but the relationship is unique in each case. The nature of the urban outsider is ambivalent in Ankur as Surya assumes the role of the feudal lord. His progressive ideals disappear and he turns out to be shallow. The change in Ankur begins from within without any help from external agents; whereas in Nishant and Manthan, the consciousness of exploitation is brought about by an outsider. Whether it is a government schoolteacher or the veterinary doctor, they are outsiders and more educated than the villagers. The schoolteacher stands between the other two principal characters in Ankur and Manthan, who represent two extremes. Surya, the urban man in Ankur is shallow and exploitative; whereas the urban man in Manthan is noble and capable of empowering the local people. The schoolteacher in Nishant, however, brings new consciousness into the village, but needs the help of local people and the priest to achieve his purpose. The relationship between the schoolteacher and the villagers is that of mutual empowerment. What makes Ankur different from the other films is that the seed of change is sown from within. The schoolteacher in Nishant comes from the outside, but protest in Ankur begins from within. These narratives capture the conflict between feudalism and modernity which India as a nation has been facing ever since India achieved independence. Benegal, instead of dividing India in sharp and well-defined categories of rural and urban India, tries to establish a connection between the two. Although Surya cultivates a modern outlook, he fails to transcend his traditional feudal moorings. Nishant shows the helplessness of a qualified schoolteacher. He is aware of his rights as a citizen and the different institutions of justice in a democracy, but he realises the ineffectiveness and failure of these modern institutions within the rigid structures of village life. In Manthan, an urban veterinary doctor, who works with missionary zeal in the village, empowers the villagers. A realist to the core, Benegal shows the difficulties an urban outsider faces while empowering the rural poor. Seen in the historical frame of the Emergency, the film portrays the implementation of the difficult socialist ideals that Indira Gandhi’s regime was trying to implement. Manthan, instead of giving a fairy-tale-like solution to the problems, shows the protagonist’s determination to carry out his plans even in the face of adversities. Benegal shows the (nation)-state’s agenda of social development through his realist aesthetics. The film illustrates the vulnerability of an individual when put against the existing system. The ray of hope lies in the low-caste villagers attaining the consciousness of self-empowerment, by deciding to set up their milk-co-operative independently and are able to attain freedom from exploitation as a result. As discussed in the beginning of the chapter, the hegemony of the highcaste is a construction. Although it has been discussed as a part of the social development movement of the state, Benegal’s cinema builds a counter argument to the hegemonic discourse of the upper-caste. In contemporary

44

A S S E R T I O N TO E M P OW E R M E N T

India (also in the India of the 1970s), with all the religious sanctions on the Dalit, and with all the economic resources and industry and the institutions of democracy in the hands of the upper-caste, the problems of the Dalit and women remain unsolved. Benegal through his first trilogy of Ankur, Nishant and Manthan calls for social change. He does not suggest a single solution to the problem. In Ankur, he suggests a rebellion starting from the Dalit and in Nishant and Manthan, the change begins via an outsider who raises the locals’ awareness of their oppression. But in all three films, the oppressed learn to assert themselves for their dignity. Benegal traces a trajectory from assertion to empowerment of the Dalit in Indian society with each film. Weaving history into his narratives (Peasants’ Revolt in Andhra and the Operation Flood in Gujarat), these films narrate the changes taking place in the social and political spheres of post-colonial India. Benegal’s cinema captures the historic moment of social change in which the Dalit started their journey from the sidelines towards the centre. The Dalit, who were earlier excluded from the political sphere in India, have gradually begun to create their political constituency. The process of identity assertion by the Dalit as a movement in the social and political sphere of India continues. Although the current socio-political scenarios have changed a lot compared to the context in which Benegal made these films, the problems of the Dalit and women continue to challenge India as a nation-state. Benegal’s early cinema lends a voice to the voiceless. His idea of India is not of a romanticised ideal nation-state, rather through his aesthetics of realism, he has been keen to offer a critique. Through his cinematic frames, he has placed the problems of the oppressed and the marginalised in the popular imagination of the Indian audience. Looking at the prevalent state of affairs in India, his political cinema remains equally relevant in the 2000s.

Notes 1 By Anveshi web editor, Alisamma Women’s Collective.Online published on January 07, 2014. www.anveshi.org.in/alisamma-womens-collective-manifesto Accessed on January 08, 2019. 2 Anveshi Research Centre for Women’s Studies is an organisation committed to researching on minorities, Dalit, women and other various issues from a feminist perspective. 3 Varna system divided Hindu society into four groups of Brahmins, Kshatriyas, Vaishyas and Shudra. 4 There have been many reports in different newspapers, online news portals and international news agencies such as the BBC about increasing violence against the Dalit in India in the last decade, for example there have been stories on violence against dalits in The Wire, Frontline, BBC. www.indiatimes.com. 5 A survey of Times of India reveals that crime against Dalit has increased by 245% during the 2010s. For further details, see http://timesofindia.indiatimes. com/india/Crimes-against-dalits-rise-245-in-last-decade/articleshow/39904583. cms.

45

A S S E R T I O N TO E M P OW E R M E N T

6 There are studies which show that dalits are being co-opted by rightwing politics to bring them back into the Hindu fold and even to make them participate in anti-Muslim activities. 7 Italics original. 8 Brahmins were associated with the pursuit and dissemination of knowledge; Kshatriyas were the ruling class or warriors; Vaishyas were the producers and traders; and Shudras did the menial jobs for other groups of the society. 9 Vedic Age is from 1500 B.C.E. to 1000 B.C.E. and Later Vedic Age is from 1000 B.C.E, to 600 B.C.E. 10 The conspiracy of exclusion is further strengthened by the fact that there were 62 schools of philosophy, to which Buddhists and Jains refer, but are excluded by the Brahmanical sources. For details, see The Penguin History of Early India by Romila Thapar. 11 Historically, two major empires in the Ancient period of the history of India namely Maurya Empire and Gupta Empire, were the empires of non-kshtariyas. The Mauryan Empire was supposedly an empire of a tribe and the Gupta Empire was an empire of the Vaishyas. 12 For details, refer to the book by Dipankar Gupta. 13 Singha Roy and Rohan D. Matthews. 14 The full article can be accessed at http://base.d-p-h.info/fr/fiches/dph/fiche-dph8892.html. 15 P. Sudarayya has written a report on the Peasants’ Revolt titled Telengana People’s Struggle and its Lessons. 16 Dalit Panthers was a radical organisation. It was founded by Namdeo Dasal, Raja Dhale and Arun Kamble in 1972. It had ideological alignment towards the Black Panthers movement of the U.S.A. and aimed towards filling the vacuum of Dalit politics in free India. 17 http://silhouette-mag.wikidot.com/article-cat:vol5-cover-pg4. 18 It refers to people living in the forest in the Ramayana. Hanuman is the famous Vanar God in Hindu mythology. 19 Zamindaar means the landlord, who is also feudal lord of the village. 20 Dr. Varghese Kurien was the chairman of the milk co-operative. Lal Bahadur Shasstri, the second Prime Minister of India was extremely happy with the way the co-operative was functioning in Gujrat. He wanted the pattern to be followed all over the country. Consequently, the Dairy Development Board was created and Dr. Verghese Kurien was made the director of the co-operative. 21 The information has been borrowed from an article authored by Zia Us Salam published in The Hindu on September 13, 2012. For details visit. www.thehindu. com/features/cinema/manthan-1976/article3892670.ece and an article titled “Nigeria and India: The Use of Film for Development-Whispers in a Crowd” authored by Matthew E. Sauer, published in African Media Review. Vol. 6, (1), 1992.

46

2 WOMEN AND THE NATION

Most of the theoreticians of nation and nation-state such as Ernest Gellner, Eric Hobsbawm, Benedict Anderson, while theorising the process of nationbuilding, have focused on ethnicity, race, or the military and commercial enterprise of men. In their imagination, the people have signified solely as men. Consequently, nation and nationalism have been defined from the point of view of men. The aggressive masculinity has been performing nationalism in the public sphere in various forms such as business enterprises, war and even communal riots.1 The ideas of nation and nationalism have fostered connections between nation, nationalism and masculinity, putting women on the sidelines. Historically speaking, social changes and evolution of one form of social order to another has also been the story of marginalisation of women in one way or the other. As “all nations are gendered, all nations are invented” (McClintock 1993: 61) and allied with institutions of power and violence, the male-centric apparatus marginalises women. Even the concept of the citizenry is also gendered.2 Feminists therefore perceive nationalism to be a gendered discourse. The state, as a political and administrative institution, has sanctioned and legitimised gender differences. Manhood and nationhood; masculinity and nationalism; the man and the nation(-state) have been so close that the majority of people took this arrangement to be natural and accepted it without questioning it. “Women are represented as atavistic and authentic bodies of tradition (inert, backward-looking, and natural) embodying nationalism’s conservative principle of continuity” (McClintock 1993: 66). While women were excluded from the masculinised public sphere, the female body continued to be the site where ideologies of nationalism have been exercised during peacetime as well as during conflict. However, Jill Vickers, a feminist political scientist, recounts various instances in India, the Philippines, Finland and Norway, where women’s participation in the nationalist movement in colonial nations, women’s emancipation in post-colonial nations or anti-imperialist nations, has been of conspicuous magnitude. In historically and ideologically different contexts of India, both colonial and post-colonial, the focus had been on the female body to represent the ideal nation. The image of pure, ideal Indian woman vis-à-vis western culture 47

WO M E N A N D T H E N AT I O N

has been a potent site embodying the ideologies of nationalism in India. The socio-religious reform movements in nineteenth-century India constructed the image of a morally and spiritually pure Indian woman, which served as the function of ideological weaponry against the Western forces. The image of the pure Indian woman confined the space women were given in the patriarchal society. Farina Mir, a historian of colonial and post-colonial South Asia, is of the opinion that under the influence of socio-religious reform movements, the space of the middle-class, upper-caste women was confined to home and “respectability espoused by socio-religious reformers had a discernible impact on women and gender relations [. . .] the ‘reform’ of women re-inscribed their subjection to patriarchy” (Mir 2010: 141). The women’s movement in colonial India has different complexions. The history of the women’s movement and the progressive movement in India date back to the pre-independence period and continues in post-colonial times as well. Maithreyi Krishanraj, a scholar of gender studies, while tracing the history of the women’s movement in India contends that under the influence of social reform movements, an opinion in favour of the eradication of the sati system and purda system, women’s education for the highcaste Hindu women was built. Gandhi ushered women into the nationalist movement. But the paradox of this phase of the women’s movement is that this phase imagined women to be enlightened and educated to become better wives and mothers. Women’s issues were raised, but patriarchy was not questioned. The social reform movement attempted to improve the status of women within the frame of patriarchy. Savitribai Phule, a social reformer, poet and educationist who worked for women’s rights in the colonial India, worked against discrimination on the basis of caste and gender along with her husband, Jyotirao Phule. She established the first girls’ school in Pune. In post-colonial times, especially in Hindi cinema, the image of the ideal Indian (Hindu) woman contributed towards propagating a patriarchal view of India as a nation. Making family the metaphor of the nation, it became the mother’s responsibility to raise the children, to build children’s moral fabric; thus, symbolic of the moral fabric of the nation. The character of Radha (Nargis) in Mehboob Khan’s Mother India (1957), a remake of Mehboob Khan’s Aurat (1940), valorised the mother figure in India who would suffer and work hard, but did not compromise on her chastity and purity. So much so, her moral integrity is so high that she would not hesitate to kill her son to save the honour of another female of the village. Although the film offers an image of a strong and upright Indian woman, it also strengthens the patriarchal set-up in which women are made to carry the burden of high moral values. “Nationalist discourse constitutes the female body as a privileged signifier and various struggles are waged over the meaning and ownership of the body” (Datta 2000: 73). Within patriarchal values, the female body has been the recipient of male-centric ideologies. 48

WO M E N A N D T H E N AT I O N

In Hindi films the image of the nation as a mythical community- a family-collapses under the weight of its own contradictions. Gender, heterosexuality, class, and religious communities crosshatch the nation, and each of these disrupts the nationalist narration in Hindi cinema to reveal a different history. (Virdi 2003: 1) Jyotika Virdi begins her book with the above quote for developing her argument on restructuring the social history of India through popular Hindi Cinema. Virdi opines that in India, a country with a lesser literacy rate than European countries, the visual nature of cinema played a similar role to that which book publishing played under capitalism in the West. Hindi cinema helps Indian audience(s) imagine India as a patriarchal nation. Most of the structuring patterns of popular Indian imagination are determined by the nature of Hindi cinema, which also constructs and propagates certain identities in people’s imagination in India. By “making complex but decipherable hieroglyphics” (Virdi 2003: 7), Indian popular cinema “configures the nation and constructs a national imagery” (Virdi 2003: 7). On the one hand, the cinema has influenced the way Indian audiences imagine India; on the other, it also reflects the perception of various minority groups in India by the majority group, especially women. The ideal Indian mother or ideal Indian wife always remained subservient to man. An Indian woman did not even have control of her own body. Benegal in his oeuvre has raised the issues of women. This chapter is devoted to the study of films in which women in all different shades are given the centre-stage. Different films to be discussed in this chapter deal with different facets of women’s problems in Indian society. These narratives reflect issues that became important at different junctures in the history of free India. Different films discussed in this chapter either bring to the surface the issues of a woman’s identity or her struggle to attain one in a patriarchal society, women’s sexuality, their changing status in society and the challenges faced by them. Made between 1970 through the 1990s, these films, thus, become essential to critique the patriarchal social and political structures of India. These films question India as a nation from women’s point of view. Some of these films raise the question of Muslim women’s identity and offer a critique of the idea of imagining India as a Hindu nation-state. The concept of identity in India underwent a significant change during the British rule. The british rule in India introduced India to modernity in terms of new thought, industry, science, new political institutions and administrative models; at the same time, the British policies for administration were such that it led to the crystallisation and polarisation of fluid and porous religious identities. Indians witnessed the aftermath of the polarisation of identities during the holocaust of the Partition in 1947, which has increased further since the 1980s and early 1990s. These years of post-colonial India 49

WO M E N A N D T H E N AT I O N

also witnessed a fast revival of the ideology of Hindutva, facilitated by the Shah Bano case, opening the door of the Ram Temple, the broadcast of TV serials based on Hindu mythology, the memory of partition and the privatisation of Indian economy.3 The 1990s saw the emergence of N.D.A. (National Democratic Alliance) into power, which played a crucial role in making the discourse of Hindutva become a part of the day-to-day register of language. In this context, Meera Nanda makes a relevant intervention. To quote: Aided by the new political economy, a new Hindu religiosity is getting ever more deeply embedded in everyday life, both in public and private spheres. Use of explicitly Hindu rituals and symbols in the routine affairs of the state and electoral politics has become so commonplace that Hinduism has become the de facto religion of the ‘secular’ Indian state which is constitutionally bound to have no official religion. (Nanda 2011: 2) The Muslim identity in India, irrespective of the territorial dimension, becomes a politically contentious concept, especially when perceived through the lens of Hindutva ideology. The Hindutva ideology, forged by Savarkar during the British rule in India,4 gained impetus during the latter half of the 1980s with the demand of reconstructing the Ram Temple on the site of the Babar’s mosque. A section of media further fanned the ideology of Hindutva. The broadcast of the TV serial, the Ramayana directed by Ramanand Sagar, based on the Hindu epic, helped the cause of Hindutva ideology. The demolition of Babri Masjid (read Babar’s mosque) brought to the surface the chasm in Indian society. The discourse of Hindutva ideology is based on imagining Muslims as “outsiders” and a potent threat to Hindu Rashtra (nation) or the dream of Akhand Bharta.5 Focusing on different aspects of women, identity and nationalist ideology, the chapter studies five women-centric films, Bhumika, Mandi, Sardari Beghum, Mammo and Zubeidaa. Divided into two parts, the first part studies Bhumika and Mandi; and the second part, Mammo, Sardari Begum and Zubeidaa. I

Bhumika (The Role, 1977) Based on the autobiography of Hansa Wadkar, a talented and famous Marathi and Hindi film actor, titled Sangtye Aika or You Ask, I Tell (which also happens to be one of the Marathi films in which she had acted), Bhumika is the story of a female actor’s search for identity in a male-dominated society. Bhumika marks a shift in Benegal’s cinema. After having made his first rural trilogy (Ankur, Nishant and Manthan), he focused his lens on urban India, 50

WO M E N A N D T H E N AT I O N

Bombay to be precise, in this film. He also moved away from the linear chronology of narrative technique that he had adopted in his earlier realist films. The non-linear chronology of Bhumika is punctuated with flashbacks or analepses.6 The narrative moves between past and present. Temporal shifts in the film are used to help establish connections between memory and the self of the protagonist. Benegal has used colour and black and white filmstock to create the effect of the present and the past. Filmmaking, studio and cinema screen become a part of the narrative and the relation between the protagonist’s real life and reel life is masterfully explored in the film. Benegal has not only shown Bombay in his films for the first time, he has also created the period effect successfully. Creating the city of the 1930s through the 1940s was not so difficult for him, according to Datta, as his office was close to Jyoti Studio, the oldest studio in the city. In addition, the past was created through sonic signifiers as well. Announcements on the radio become a vital source to decipher the time period of events in the film. In a sequence when Usha expresses her desire to marry Keshav, announcements regarding the Red Army and Axis Powers could be heard on the radio to create the period of the 1940s. In another scene, Usha is listening to a song Mere Zindagi Ki Kashti Tere Pyaar Ka Sahara sung by Chandru Atma. His tonal quality and singing style matches that of K.L. Sehgal and C.H. Atma, Chandru Atma’s elder brother.7 Later, when Usha and Keshav marry, the famous song of the 1940s – Ek Bangla Bane Pyara – is being played. In another sequence, Keshav tells Usha that her second baby, which is on the way, cannot grow up in his house. Usha is left with no other option but to abort the child. While this event is happening in the film, Joseph Stalin’s death is announced on the radio. Hansa Wadkar, which was the screen name of Ratan Bhalchandra Salgonkar, had acted in Marathi and Hindi films. Wadkar’s autobiography was “narrated to the writer Arun Sandhu and serialised before being published as a book by a Pune-based publishing house. Her story created much controversy, as several well-known men had been involved with her, although their names had been changed before publication” (Datta 2008: 183). Popularly known as the Joan Crawford of the Marathi stage and screen, Wadkar was born to Bhalchandra Salgaonkar (father) and Saraswati (mother) on January 24, 1923. Hansa’s father belonged to the community of Kalavantis, courtesans who were accomplished in music and her mother belonged to the community of Devdasi. Marriage in courtesan families in those times was rare, but Wadkar’s grandfather was the first person to marry. As Wadkar mentions in the beginning of her autobiography, her great grandmother Baybai Salgaokar, popularly called Jiji, was a rich courtesan. Wadkar’s father was bequeathed a house at Sawantwadi from Jiji, where the young Wadkar used to live. It is from this house they then relocated to Bombay. Bhalchandra Salgaonkar had three sisters: Kesharbai, called “mai”; Indirabai, called “baiji”, and Sushhilabai, called “‘tai” (Wadkar 2013: 430–431). 51

WO M E N A N D T H E N AT I O N

Among his three sisters, Indirabai was working in films and Master Vinayak, the husband of another sister, Kesharbai, was a renowned actor-director of Indian cinema. Wadkar had the opportunity of working under various directors from different companies. While working with the famous Bombay Talkies, she worked under Franz Osten in Durga (1939); while working with the Prabhat Film Company, she worked in Sant Sakhu (1941) and Ram Shastri (1944), a bilingual film made in Marathi and Hindi. The latter film was a biopic based on the life of Chief Justice, Ram Shastri. While working with National Studios, Wadkar worked in Apna Paraya (1942) and Mera Gaon (1942) and with Rajkamal Kalamandir, she worked in Lokshahir Ram Joshi (1947), a biopic based on the life of a poet and Lavani dancer, Ram Joshi. The film was co-directed by V. Shantaram and is referred to as the classic Marathi Tamasha film. During the later years of her career, she acted in Mee Tulas Tuzya Angani (I am the Tulsi of your Courtyard)8 in which Wadkar played a vamp. The film won the National Award for the Best Feature Film in Marathi. Based on the life of Hansa Wadkar, the central character of the film is Usha (Smita Patil), whose screen name in the film is Urvashi. She is a famous singer-actor of the 1930s and 1940s. The film narrates the story of Usha’s struggle to gain her identity in a male-dominated society. Her story of success, career and fame is woven with her personal unhappiness and search for love in multiple man-woman relationships. Usha lives with her husband, Keshav Dalvi (Amol Palekar), who was her benefactor back in the village in which she grew up. While Usha works in films and earns money, her husband sits at home as he has lost money in his business. He instead claims that he has invested his time in making Usha’s career. Analepsis or flashback at this moment provides essential information about Usha’s past in which her mother is married to a Brahmin man, who is an invalid. Usha’s maternal grandmother is a renowned classical singer. Usha has been trained in classical vocal music by her grandmother. After the death of Usha’s father, she is forced to work in films to support the family. Keshav Dalvi brings Usha’s family to the film studio and introduces her to a film company. Usha’s rise to stardom as an actor is rapid. In the present, Usha and her husband fight frequently. Usha, after the birth of her daughter, does not want to work; but once again her family circumstances force her to do so against her wishes. One day after an argument with her husband, Usha leaves the house and goes to Rajan (Anant Nag), her co-actor. While waiting for Rajan at his house, the narrative observes another analepsis. This analepsis conveys that Usha married Keshav against the wishes of her mother. After her marriage, she comes home to seek her mother’s and grandmother’s blessings. Her grandmother, who is also her music guru gives Usha her blessings by singing the famous bandish of Shudh Kalyan – Mandarva Bajo Re – which Usha has been singing since her childhood. Usha follows her grandmother in singing while strumming on tanpura 52

WO M E N A N D T H E N AT I O N

and her unhappy mother stands in the background. In the next shot, Usha and her grandmother are shown singing together while Usha’s mother walks in the corridor. They are separated by a wall between them. The camera shows the empty corridor of the house while they continue to sing and the raga echoes in the house. The analepsis ends when she is forced by her husband to work in films because of their economic circumstances. Back in the present, Rajan proposes to marry Usha and urges her to divorce Keshav. Usha does not accept his proposal saying that she does not want to lose Rajan. She moves into an independent room in a hotel. While standing in front of a mirror, her past starts tormenting her. The narrative shows Usha working in various films under her screen name, Urvashi. Her husband continues to force her to work and attend parties against her wishes. The matter comes to a head when she learns that her husband did not share with her the news of her grandmother’s death because doing so might have affected her career. In the present, tensions between Usha and her husband continue to rankle Usha. Keshav follows Usha into the hotel room where she is staying at that time. Usha refuses to meet him despite his various attempts. Irate and disturbed, Usha comes out of her room and hears the voice of her grandmother’s record being played in the opposite room. Usha knocks at the door and enters the room where Vinayak Kale (Amrish Puri) is listening to the music with his friend, Sutar (Mohan Agashe). Vinayak Kale is more interested in his business dealings and shows little respect for Usha. Furious, Usha leaves the room. Next day, Usha goes to apologise to Kale for her behaviour. In the next scene, Usha is going with Kale to live with him. Away from the city, Vinayak Kale has a huge mansion. He has a son and his second wife is suffering from paralysis. Gradually, Usha realises that she is no more than a captive in his house. She cannot leave the house without Kale’s permission. Her condition becomes no better than Kale’s ailing wife who is confined to bed; whereas Usha is confined to Kale’s house. The dream of freedom and happiness she was looking for in Bombay has been crudely crushed by the traditions of the family of which Vinayak Kale is the patriarch. Rebellious Usha shuts herself in Kale’s second wife’s room and denies Kale the conjugal pleasure he sought with her. On the radio, the newsreader announces that General Ayub Khan has taken control of Pakistan. Usha has managed to send a letter secretly with the help of a female vegetable and fish vendor. One day her husband comes with the police to rescue her. In Kale’s presence, she takes leave of everyone and goes with her husband. When she reaches Bombay, she comes to know that her mother has died. She and Keshav are sitting in a car. All over the city posters advertising Usha’s film are prominent in the city. Keshav asks Usha to give their relationship another chance. Keshav knows her answer. That is why he has booked a room for her in a hotel. In the room, Usha meets her daughter who has married. She and her husband want her to stay with them. While her grandmother’s Shudh Kalyan record 53

WO M E N A N D T H E N AT I O N

is being played, she asks her daughter to visit her sometimes. She decides to stay alone as she understands it is her responsibility to deal with her loneliness. Rajan calls her. Usha hangs up the phone. While Rajan’s voice calling Usha’s name can be heard, the film ends. The film deals with a woman’s search for identity and the challenges she faces in a patriarchal society. Usha is sensitive, strong-willed, independent and impulsive, and at the same time, headstrong. She wishes to live a free and independent life, but her flight is always curtailed by her caste and gender. Her free spirit is continuously circumscribed by the constraints of the society and expectations of the family. She is constantly in search of her identity and inner happiness in a male-dominated society which assigns fixed roles to women. A victim of the conflict between her wishes and the social structure, she remains unhappy throughout her life. Like the tragic characters of Thomas Hardy’s narratives, her tragedy is punctuated not merely with the blows of chance, but also enhanced by the social structure she is a part of. Born to a Devdasi mother, her being trained by her grandmother as a singer par excellence, her father’s death and her working in films when she was just a child – are matters of chance and circumstances over which she has no control. Her gender and the background of Devdasi circumscribe her world, make her options limited and also determine the role she would be playing in her life. The conflict in the narrative, thus, is not merely between her and unknown divine forces; but between her and the social structure. As a caged bird, she struggles hard to exercise her “agency”, to find inner happiness and to find a free sky for herself, which is important for her own identity. For her, the entire world became a stage where she played many parts. In her journey, she plays many roles in her real life as well as in her professional life as an actor. In her private sphere, she performs various roles, of which some were socially sanctioned roles while other roles were unconventional. She becomes pregnant before her marriage; she marries Keshav against her mother’s wishes. As a wife, she would support her family; as a mother, she has loved her daughter and tolerated her husband’s wrong doings to her. Her husband is an emotionally and sexually insecure man, which becomes the cause of discord between them. She is close to Rajan; she becomes Sunil Verma’s lover; she becomes Kale’s mistress and also his captive. Owing to the rebellious nature with which she is born, she cannot meekly resign herself to her miserable fate. She longs for escape and freedom; but ironically, never succeeds. Every attempt at freedom resulted in a relationship with a new man. The tentacles of patriarchy are so widely spread and their hold is so tight that however hard she tries to escape, she fails. Her life, as shown in the film, becomes a tragedy of her fight against structures of patriarchy which are far stronger than her. Adaptation of a memoir, the film narrative uses flashback as a technique to unravel Usha’s memory. In the beginning of the film, when an argument between Usha and her husband is in progress, the voice of Usha’s 54

WO M E N A N D T H E N AT I O N

grandmother singing classical music can be heard. When Usha decides to leave her husband’s house, before the Visual-Image in the film observes an analepsis, the Sound-Image does.9 The voice of young Usha’s mother calling her name can be heard on the track as Usha is getting into a taxi. Adult Usha’s moving out of her husband’s house is juxtaposed with young Usha’s running away. Shot in black and white format, the flashback narrates events essential to reveal Usha’s rebellious nature as a child, her family background, her father’s addiction to alcohol, her father’s death and Keshav Dalvi’s proximity to the family. The technique of flashback makes the narrative shift in time and space and also helps in adapting memory and personal history to understand Usha. When young Usha is introduced, she is shown “running away” in a synecdoche shot. A small sequence with Keshav Dalvi also reveals her free-spirited and rebellious nature. The film portrays Usha as a rebellious, self-willed woman, pitted against three men: her husband, her lovers and admirers in Rajan, Sunil Verma and later, Kale. Usha is an unconventional and unhappy woman who has more than one man in her life, an aspect of Usha’s life that the film focuses heavily upon. In her memoirs, she talks about various women through whom she found moments of happiness in her life. She would stitch, sew and even drink with them. Hansa Wadkar has also portrayed the world of the film industry from within. She believes that in the film industry, no woman can remain clean and pure. Nevertheless, there were a few good men whom Wadkar respected. Wadkar talked about various famous and lesser-known personalities of the film industry without malice. The self that emerges in Wadkar’s autobiography is that of a social rebel, an impulsive woman who has been wronged on more than one occasion. Yet she would find ways to smile. Wadkar is self-critical as well in the book. She admits the mistakes she thinks she has committed in her life but. The film puts Usha against only men without showing signs of her being self-critical. Benegal’s interest in the film has been more of the critique of patriarchy and Usha’s struggle to find her identity and happiness in her life.

Mandi (1983) Made in 1983, Mandi is an adaptation of a short story titled “Anandi” written by Ghulam Abbas, a Pakistani writer. The screenplay for the film was written by Shama Zaidi, Satyadev Dubey and Shyam Benegal. The film narrates the events around Rukmani Bai, who runs a Kotha (a dedicated space for courtesans or tawaif) in the backstreets of Hyderabad. As the Kotha is located at a central position within the town, it is eyed by local politicians, businessmen as well as the president of the Nari Niketan (Hindi for a home for women), who believes that prostitution is a social evil and should be eradicated from society. Within one narrative, the filmmaker has woven the issue of nexus between business and politics, moral decadence, market 55

WO M E N A N D T H E N AT I O N

forces entering every space of the modern world, increasing commercialisation and the dying space of courtesans. Ghulam Abbas, who was born at Amritsar (now in India) in 1909, wrote a satire. As the story begins, the Municipal Committee meeting is going on, and all of its members are present. They are passionately discussing the issue of the presence of prostitutes in the middle of the town revolving around the issue of morality, decency and righteousness. Unanimously, everybody present in the meeting agreed that the prostitutes should be relocated from the town and they should be given a new place at a distance of six kos from the city. Eventually, 14 new houses, seven on each side, are constructed for them. A shrine of Baba Kharak Shah and the mosque are also renovated. A Maulvi and a fakir, a Sufi ascetic, move there too. Seeing the prospect of business in this newly developed area, small merchants from the surrounding villages moved there and later, more prominent merchants from the town relocate there too. After many years, the new settlement with a population of 250,000 had established a post-office, public schools for boys and girls, a railway station and also a police station. As the story ends, a meeting of the Municipal Committee is in progress to discuss that the central market of the city also has zenaana-e-bazaari – the women of the marketplace. They are deliberating that these women should be given a new place at least twelve kos away from the main city. Benegal’s film is not a faithful adaptation of the story. However, it interprets the story in the context of India encountering modernity. The film is set in a town on the outskirts of Hyderabad. In the centre-stage of the film are Rukmini Bai (Shabana Azmi) and the Kotha she runs in the backstreets of Hyderabad. In Benegal’s aesthetics of realism, the film does not offer the image of grandeur usually associated with courtesan films mostly set in Lucknow. It should not lead to a generalisation that courtesans in Hyderabad did not have a past. Rather, the history of Hyderabad entails histories of famous Hindu courtesans. Karen Leonard in her article on the courtesans of Hyderabad narrates the popular legend about the inception of the city in 1590–1591. Prince Muhammad Ali Qutb Shah used to cross the river to meet Bhagmati, a famous courtesan. He established a city for her, which was called Bhagyanagar. When he married Bhagmati and she acquired the name of Hyder Mahal, the city was renamed as Hyderabad. Karen states that courtesans in Hyderabad used to enjoy a privileged position. To quote: Court cases from the Hyderabad state in the 1870s contain fascinating material about the lifestyle of Hyderabad’s nineteenth-century courtesans. These women had access to leading political figures and exercised considerable financial and social independence. Living and working in close proximity to state bureaucrats and nobles, they clearly were intimate participants in urban life and political affairs, sometimes as powerful figures in courts, sometimes as property 56

WO M E N A N D T H E N AT I O N

owners. [. . .] The Hyderabad courtesans earned for themselves but also for others. They were regulated in important ways, first by the heads of their own establishments or ‘mothers’ and then by officials and employees of Nizam’s household administration and the state judicial system. . . (429) Leonard continues, among three kinds of courtesans, namely Derahdari (who were mobile and would perform for the Nawab); Chakladari (who would stay in a house and had a middle-class clientele. They would perform at weddings) and Bazaar (who would be placed in the bazar), there would only be a “mother” among Chakladari.10 As Hyderabad was not a part of the British empire in India, its administration was structured on the model of Mughal administration. It was during the period of Salar Jung that some aspects of the British administration were also adopted by the administration of Hyderabad. Tawaifs in Hyderabad, who were part of Arbab-e-Nishat11 adapted themselves to the changing times. The film’s discourse is not limited to the narrative of courtesans of Hyderabad. There are other voices of social and political relevance embedded in the film. The film rather makes a sharp comment on the depleting moral values, profligacy and corruption in every sphere of modern life. Courtesans and the Kotha are metaphors for the society that exists outside the Kotha. The tone and tenor of this film are not like conventional courtesan films. The first striking element about the film is its unconventional mise-en-scène that the audience is conditioned to see in traditional courtesan films. Along with the visual image, the sound becomes part of the underlying theme of the film. Early on, Benegal deconditions his audience as the scene is marked with the noise, cacophony and chaos taking place in the early hours at the Kotha. There is no finesse in the mannerisms of the women living in the Kotha. Rukmini exhibits the mannerisms befitting a tawaif as a mask while she is playing a tawaif with customers. The deromanticised image of tawaif takes the audience closer to their day-to-day affairs, materialist needs and the anxiety to survive in modern times. The film begins with Mr. Aggarwal (Kulbhushan Kharbanda) negotiating the price of a piece of land he is interested in buying which is followed by a song in the Kotha along with the titles of the film. The opening scene presents two kinds of Mandis or markets in society: the Kotha and the commercial enterprise of the businessmen. As the next scene opens, Zeenat (Smita Patil) is doing riyaz12 in the morning. She is mastering her notes on Raag Lalit, a morning Raga, singing a famous bandish Rain Ka Sapna. Her melody is juxtaposed with the most cacophonic sounds. Ram Gopal (Om Puri), the photographer, who is surreptitiously taking photographs of the women inhabiting the Kotha whilst they are naked in the hope of selling them at the market, when a monkey accidentally enters the Kotha. In the chaos, 57

WO M E N A N D T H E N AT I O N

Rukmini Bai (Shabana Azmi) is negotiating with Mr Gupta, while Zeenat is mastering her notes. Amidst the chaos, Phoolmani, a deaf and dumb underage girl, is sold to Rukmini Bai by Mr Shukla. Besides the commercial interest of Mr. Gupta in the building of the Kotha, there is the constant presence of Shanti Devi (Gita Siddharth), who wishes to cleanse the city by eradicating the evil of prostitution. The space of Kotha becomes the space of negotiation between the traditional profession of courtesans and elements of modernity. She puts pressure on Rukmini Bai to hand over the under-aged girl to the Nari Niketan of which she is the president. Rukmini Bai, the matriarch of the Kotha, has to struggle against multiple forces. She has to negotiate with Mr Gupta and simultaneously she has to tackle Shanti Devi’s agenda of moral sanitisation. In the meantime, in the meeting of the Municipal Committee, it is ordered that the prostitutes cannot be allowed to practise their profession in the middle of the city bazaar. Mr Aggarwal (Sayyed Jaffrey), the chairman of the committee, has no other option but to accept the decision of the committee. Meanwhile, Mr Aggarwal’s son, who is getting engaged to Mr Gupta’s daughter, falls for Zeenat. As Zeenat is Mr Aggarwal’s illegitimate daughter whom Rukmini Bai has brought up, Rukmini Bai expresses her strong disagreement with Zeenat about this budding romance. Finally, Rukmini and all the other women are forced to vacate the house. They are given a piece of land outside the city where a new house for them is constructed. While the construction is in progress, Rukmini can sense that she is losing control of the world she has successfully run so far. A Sufi saint appears. He asks her to pray at the shrine of Baba Kharak Shah, which was in a dilapidated state. Rukmini prays there and also offers to rebuild the shrine. After her world is restored, she builds Baba Kharak Shah’s shrine there. In the meantime, the Municipal Committee is again considering widening the boundaries of the municipality to include the shrine of Baba Kharak Shah within the limits of the municipality, which further threatens Rukmini Bai. Mr Aggarwal’s son comes one night and elopes with Zeenat. Zeenat, by this time, knows that Mr Aggarwal’s son is her half-brother. She runs away with him to escape from the Kotha. In her absence, other women in the Kotha also express their unwillingness to continue working under Rukmini as each one has her own plan. Defeated and crying, Rukmini finds hope when she sees that Phulmani, running away from the Nari Niketan, has come back to her before the film ends. The Municipal Committee considers letting the women run their brothel from the central location of the city which would have a bad influence on society. They prefer that the women working in the Kotha should be placed outside the limits of the municipality. Rukmini Bai and Zeenat imagine themselves as artistes committed to the world of music and dance. The conflict between Shanti Devi and Rukmini Bai is symptomatic of the conflict between two value systems and society’s changing attitude towards 58

WO M E N A N D T H E N AT I O N

courtesans in India which has changed over time. Simultaneously, pressures of the rising economy, market forces and commercialisation are also threatening the space courtesans were enjoying earlier. Ram Gopal, the photographer, is symbolic of the crass commercialisation of art, reducing courtesans to mere sexual objects for male consumption. Rukmini Bai is like the “mother” of Chakladari courtesans. Rukmini Bai and other courtesans do not own the property in which they live. It is from a rented accommodation that Rukmini Bai runs her Kotha. Their house is also in the middle of the locality, which becomes the cause of disagreement among different members of the Municipal Committee. India after independence, as a nation-state, confronted the question of courtesans and their position in society which venerated morally clean and pure women. Policies that India adopted after independence complicated the position of further, especially after the abolition of the Zamindari system and integration of the princely States into the Republic of India. In the new India, courtesans lost the position they once enjoyed. Relocating the Kotha outside the limits of the municipality signifies that there is no longer any place for courtesans in the new India. Rukmini Bai’s struggle is against the economic and sanitising forces of the modern Indian state. The relationship between tawaif and Hindi cinema is as ambivalent as tawaif’s relationship with the Indian society. Ruth Vanita has counted many films in which courtesans or tawaif appear as a character, whether major or minor.13 From a patriarchal point of view, the position of tawaif has been romanticised as custodians of tehzeeb and finesse. They were the objects of desire, but not respectable members of society. They were mistresses, but not wives. As Sumita Chakravarty says, “the romanticized Other” (305) always remained on the margins of society. Their marriageability and acceptance in the mainstream were a big issue within the Hindi cinema. The film is a satirical comment on the hypocrisy of society in the wake of the changing status of courtesans in post-colonial India. The film attacks the rising cult of capitalism and hypocrisies in society, for which the Kotha becomes a metaphor. A businessman is interested in purchasing the property where the women run their business. Mr. Aggarwal has his illegitimate daughter in the Kotha and Phoolmani’s escaping the Nari Niketan exposes Sahnti Devi’s hypocritical enterprise to sanitize the society. Benegal’s film shows the decadence in society through the Kothas as social and cultural space. The film ruptures the agenda of sanitising Indian society, deconstructing the discourse of morality and purity by exposing corruption in both the social as well as the political spheres. Rukmini Bai is aware of the challenges she has to face in the times of transition. She is running her Kotha when courtesans have lost the place they used to enjoy. Nadira (Soni Razdan), a prostitute among them, voices the materialist needs of women for their survival. She and Parweena (Anita Kanwar) present a deromanticised image of courtesans. For her and Parweena (Anita Kanwar), selling their 59

WO M E N A N D T H E N AT I O N

bodies is their work. Bordello girls in the Kotha are not able to change their material conditions and continue to work as prostitutes. The presence of the two women along with Zeenat and Vasanti (Neena Gupta), a Kathak dancer in the film, throws light on the ambivalent nature of Kothas. While Parweena and other bordello girls represent the downfall of courtesans, Zeenat and Vasanti show the artistic side of courtesans. In the moment of transition, the old order is being replaced by the new. The position of the courtesans, who used to thrive under the patronage of the Nawab or Diwans (high government ministry), has been compromised. Their position deteriorated during the British colonial period. From the perspective of Victorian morality, these courtesans were reduced to prostitutes. The film exposes the nexus between politics and money; the hypocrisy of social activism and the inability of hypocritical prudish values to understand the problems of courtesans in post-colonial India. The film recalls Guru Dutt’s Pyaasa which also satirises moral corruption, decadence and hypocritical Indian society in the 1950s. Vijay (Guru Dutt) in the film finds love in Gulabo (Waheeda Rehman), who is a prostitute, whereas Meena (Mala Sinha), the woman he loved, married Mr. Ghosh (Rehman). Guru Dutt’s film uses the character of Gulabo to deconstruct the categories of good and bad. The genre of courtesans in Hindi cinema has been useful to expose hypocrisies of Indian society. Courtesan films generally narrate the pain and loneliness of courtesans behind the life of glamour, from which they wish to escape. Benegal has used the Kotha as an artistic device to expose corruption in society. The primary focus of the film is not merely to show the changing condition of courtesans in independent India. Written in the Mantoesque manner, the story by Ghulam Abbas and the film based on the story, satirises the moral decadence in the wake of rising materialism in society. While narrating tensions between old cultural institutions (Kotha), new moralistic institutions (Nari Niketan) and economic systems (businessmen), Benegal has also exposed the hypocrisy of the institutions of social reform, firstly through the shallow male activist played by Pankaj Kapoor. Using satire to his advantage (the comic satirical tone is present in the original story as well), Benegal has highlighted the challenges faced by young India in social, economic and political spheres through the metaphor of Kotha, which is perceived as a fallen place from the point of view of narrow prudish morality. II The second part of the chapter deals with the question of the “Muslim Other” in the wake of rising Hindutva ideology in the 1990s. Benegal engages with the “otherization” of the Muslim community through the metaphor of home in narratives based on Muslim women, who become further marginalised in a patriarchal society because of their gender. This part of the chapter 60

WO M E N A N D T H E N AT I O N

discusses three films Mammo, Sardari Begum and Zubeidaa. Sardari Begum is a narrative of a light classical thumri singer, who started her career giving mujra performances in private concerts. Mammo and Zubeidaa, which deal with the problems of Muslim women’s identity in post-colonial India, will be discussed later. Mammo is interpreted as a Partition film narrating identities and a search for “home”, complicated by international borders and Zubeidaa is a story of a young Muslim’s search for her identity when India as a state was dealing with the question of the princely states after independence.

Sardari Begum (1996) The story and the screenplay of the film were written by Khalid Mohamed; dialogues were written by Shama Zaidi. Though Sardari Begum is the second film in the famous Muslim trilogy by Benegal, the film will be discussed first. In Mandi and Bhumika, Benegal had already examined the issue of courtesans and women performing in the male-dominated public sphere respectively. Sardari Begum, with various narratives14 within the main narrative, is equally thematically complex. The film narrates the story of social change, issues of women’s identity, the status of performing women in Indian society, the history of courtesans and changes in the social sphere triggered by the economic policies of liberalisation in India. Sardari Begum is the story of a light classical thumri singer in India. Sardari, who does not belong to a family of singers, runs away from her father’s house to learn music from Ittan Bai (Surekha Sikri). She gradually becomes a first-class singer and dancer. She gives her first performance in a private mehfil at Hemraj’s (Amrish Puri) house in which her voice, musical notes and pitch match that of Ittan Bai’s. Hemraj takes a fancy to her and Sardari eventually becomes his mistress. During one of her performances at Hemraj’s house, Sadiq (Rajit Kapoor) finds her extremely talented and beautiful. He sees a potential singing star in Sardari and intends to exploit her voice at the radio station. He almost pleads with young Sardari to marry him and they run away from Hemraj’s place. With great effort, Sadiq introduces Sardari to music directors at the radio station. Sardari’s voice thus begins to echo on the radio and from the radio, she progresses to perform on stage. From a young Sardari, who was earlier performing in the house of Hemraj, she becomes Sardari Begum, a stage artiste. As a successful performing artiste, she extends financial help to her younger brother for his daughter’s education. Her brother, however, would not acknowledge in public that Sardari Begum is his sister. He keeps this hidden even from his daughter, Tehzeeb. As Sardari Begum’s becomes estranged from her husband, they separate. Sardari Begum starts living alone with her daughter. Sardari Begum wants her daughter to follow her tradition of singing. She is a strict mother and a music guru. As a guru, she would not tolerate 61

WO M E N A N D T H E N AT I O N

the slightest digression from the path of music. The music director proposes marriage to Sardari Begum. Sardari Begum turns down the proposal as he is not willing to adopt Sardari’s daughter. One day, Sardari Begum goes to her music room for her daily practice, riyaz. She hears some noise in the street. When she goes through the window, a stone hits her head and she dies. The film begins with Sardari Begum’s death, almost where the real story ends. A journalist named Tehzib decides to cover Sardari Begum’s story. At that point in time, she does not know that Sardari Begum is her father’s elder sister. As Tehzeeb starts working on Sardari Begum’s life, the narrative takes various analepses. She interviews various people directly or indirectly associated with Sardari Begum’s life. Each one of them has a different story to tell. From their subjective point of view, different character-narrators of the film tell stories dealing with different aspects of Sardari Begum. Sakina (Rajeshwari Sachdev), Sardari Begum’s daughter, finds Sardari Begum a heartless and strict mother; Saadiq (Rajit Kapoor) talks about Sardari Begum as a self-centred and temperamental woman. In the opinion of Ustaad Fateh Khan (S.M. Zaheer), Sardari Begum was a highly talented singer and a magnanimous woman. She would help her younger brother with money. Jabbar Abbasi (Shrivallabh Vyas) had a mixed relationship with his sister. From Hemraj’s wife’s viewpoint, Sardari was a scheming woman, who first stole her husband away from her and later, her jewellery too, when she ran away with Sadiq. Sardari Begum is the narrative of the challenges faced by performing women in the public domain and their ambivalent relationship with Indian modernity. Performing women have been called tawaif or courtesans. There are many disparaging adjectives used for courtesans such as ganewali (singer), nachne ganewali (singer and dancer), vaishya (which is very close to prostitute). The legacy of British prejudice against women performing in public continued to assert itself even in post-colonial India. The policies of free India carried forward the agenda of putting the burden of an ideal woman on the shoulder of Indian women, which aggravated the position of “Bais” in post-colonial India.15 Films based on courtesans “suggest the honour that is attached to the cultivation of the arts, though, paradoxically courtesan herself is a figure around whom these notions of honour cannot be constructed” (Bhaskar and Allen 2009: 22). Their statement recalls Sahir Ludhianvi’s lines: “yeh woh be-izzat cheez hai jo batt jati hai izzatdaron mein” (She is the dishonoured one, who is distributed among honourable men). It is crucial to discuss under which category Sardari Begum can be placed. Sardari Begum gives us the narrative of performing women coming out from the confined spaces of the Kotha, private mujra or patron’s protection to perform on the stage in modern times. The film captures the paradoxes and ambivalent attitude towards women performing in public in modern India. In the film, Sardari Begum dies as one of the leading exponents of light classical singers. Public performances on stage and recordings on the radio take her 62

WO M E N A N D T H E N AT I O N

out of the much-condemned space of private mehfils or mujra, yet it cannot be claimed that she could completely eradicate the stigma attached to women performing in public, especially thumri singers and dancers. Views expressed by Sardari Begum’s brother and the attitude of the police officer while talking about Sardari Begum reflect the attitude of Indian patriarchy. The film represents the challenges faced by those women in post-colonial India who have decided to make a career in singing, especially thumri and dadra singing. Sardari was born into a “respectable middle-class family” and she chose to pursue music. In her life, Sardari Begum makes two important journeys. She stood against the idea of women being the embodiment of the ideology of nationalism, required to free India from the impact of British colonialism in which “their sexuality has to be policed and their emergent autonomy curtailed” (Hubel 2012: 217); and in Sardari’s struggle the challenges of courtesans and thumri singers in post-colonial India can be seen. Sardari represents those who came out of the confinements of Kothas and became celebrities through public performances while struggling against the suffix of “bai”’ attached to their names.16 Modernity, technology and new cultural institutions gave them new spaces of performance. The radio station and stage were partially responsible for changing the status of performing women in Indian society. Sardari Begum’s brother, while talking to his daughter, admits that he loved his sister, but at the same, he found it difficult to accept that his sister was a thumri singer. “Usme aur ek mamuli tawaif mein farq hi kya tha . . . she was no way better than an ordinary tawaif.” His statement reflects the way courtesans or women performing in public were seen in society. Sardari Begum’s life recalls the struggle faced by iconic female singers such as Begum Akhtar, M.S. Subhalakshmi and Kishori Amonkar because of their caste and gender identity in a patriarchal society. Simultaneously, there has been a gradual decline in the popularity of thumri and dadra in contemporary times. During the first half of the twentieth century, the music scene was strongly dominated by female singers such as Rassolan Bai (1902–1974), Zohrabai Ambalewali (circa 1920–1990), Hirabai Barodekar (1905–1989), Kesarbai Kerkar (1892–1977), Gauhar Jaan (1873–1930), to name a few. Most of the above-mentioned singers were ace classical singers and expert in the khayal and thumri genre of Hindustani music, while Zohrabai also sang for films. However, in post-colonial times, the khayal genre of singing continued to be the popular form of classical singing, whereas thumri and dadra became marginalised. The “female voice” resonating in thumri and dadra has gradually been sidelined. There had been both male and female singers of thumri. Ustaad Abdul Karin Khan (1872–1930), an exponent of Hindustani classical music and founder of Kirana gharana, would be as much at ease and expressive while rendering thumris as he would be while singing khayal. Another important name associated with thumri in Hindustani classical music is Ustaad Bade Ghulam Ali Khan (1902–1968), an exponent of Patiala gharana, who was known for the slur in his voice. But the emergence of male 63

WO M E N A N D T H E N AT I O N

singers in the twentieth century can be seen as male singers occupying the space traditionally associated with female singers. Thumri has conventionally been understood as a form of light classical music in which the singer would emphasise emotions more, bhava, expressing the romantic mood, love, desire and subtle sexuality. The dominance of the Krishna-Radha motif in thumri is symbolic of the playfulness of lovers as shown during the Bhakti movement. The playfulness in these thumri songs is also suggestive of the playfulness of lovers. The female narrative voice in the lyrics of thumri songs suggests an interactive relationship between the singer and the audience. As thumri singing has been associated with courtesans who would sing in Kothas, expressing sexuality and a romantic mood by a female singer was part of enticing their prospective lovers. Sometimes, lyrics of a thumri can be directed towards a particular man someone to whom the courtesan wishes to pay her special attention. In the film, when Ittan Bai is singing the thumri Saanwariya dekh zara is aur, Hemraj, her patron, is shown lost in the melody of the initial musical notes. When Ittan Bai emphasises “Is Aur” and the rhythm begins, Hemraj turns his head towards Ittan Bai with an amorous smile on his face while smelling a flower. Ittan Bai, while singing, is also making gestures as if she were inviting Hemraj. Open playful expressions of sexuality were unacceptable to British Victorian morality during the colonial period and also to Indian nationalists in post-colonial times. Tensions between the British and Indian nationalists on the one side and singer-courtesans on the other resulted in stereotyping and marginalising the art and the artiste. “The fact that thumri’s traditional performers were songstress-courtesans (taväyafs) enhances both the femininity and marginalisation of the genre” (Perron 2002: 174). Along with the genre, the female singers excelling in the art of thumri singing were also marginalised. Sardari Begum is the story of a female who refused to follow the patriarchal norms. She stood against societal pressures and lived life on her own terms. Her spirit is aptly expressed in the song: chahe maar dalo yara, chahe kat dalo yara, Hum to Yari Karenge Dildari Karenge (You may kill me, if you wish You may cut me into pieces, if you wish I shall go ahead with my love I shall fulfil my love.)17 The young Sardari sang and danced simultaneously in a private mehfil or private mujra at Hemraj’s house. On the right of Hemraj sat Sadiq and on Hemraj’s left sat his wife. The song was, on one level, Sardari’s open declaration of love for Hemraj; and on the other, highly personal level, she 64

WO M E N A N D T H E N AT I O N

was also showing her commitment to follow her passion for music. Socially and culturally, it was an act of crossing the boundary when Sardari sang and danced in public. From a traditional and narrow moralist perspective, Sardari lost her honour by performing like a courtesan in public; but for her to follow her calling was more important than anything else. This makes her story different from other narratives about courtesans. She was neither born to a courtesan nor was she sold to a head courtesan in a Kotha as a child. It was an assertion of her will to pursue her career in music. Sardari Begum, once she crossed the threshold of her father’s house, never returned. She created a niche of her own. She started her journey by running away from her father’s house. In this journey, she had to work under the patronage of men either by becoming Hemraj’s mistress or Sadiq’s wife in a patriarchal society. Although she was a successful light classical singer in modern times, the stigma attached to her profession could not be removed. She fought against it, despite having been disowned by her family. The film stands out as different because, unlike most popular courtesan films such as Umrao Jaan or Pakeezah; it is not a film in which “the marriage that is about to take place at the end [. . .] is nevertheless meant to be read as a happy ending for the courtesan” (Hubel 2012: 215). She does accept Sadiq as her husband and as a lover who promises her a world outside Hemraj’s haveli, but she is never shown as a suffering woman nor does she have a strong urge to escape, as commonly found in traditional courtesan films. Sardari does not become subservient to her husband. Her passion for music provides her with the strength to withstand and resist social pressures. The successful and older Sardari Begum negotiates the terms of her marriage with Salim Ghouse (Manik Sen), the radio director, who proposes to her. Sardari Begum turns down his proposal. Sardari Begum cannot be perceived as any other courtesan. In the “hegemonic masculine view of the Hindi cinema, any woman would rather be respectably married to a man and dependent on him than be a tawaif” (Booth 2007: 14). Sardari Begum’s life turns out to be so inspiring that, while discovering the life of Sardari Begum, Tehzeeb discovers her voice as well. At the end of the film, she grows strong enough to turn down her boss’s proposal. The film does not conform to the patriarchal values of Indian society, rather it challenges them. The film critiques patriarchy and exposes it through the narrative of a marginalised artiste. The film explores the problems of the complex relationship of thumri singers in particular and Muslim thumri singers with the post-colonial Indian society. Sardari Begum is the marginalised female expressing her femininity through a marginalised genre of light Hindustani classical music. Sardari Begum is the story of a woman independently defying norms of the patriarchal society. In the perspective of complexities associated with the status of women and especially songstresses-courtesans in society, the narrative structure becomes a powerful metaphor in the hands of the filmmaker. Sardari Begum is perceived from multiple points of view. Each homodiegetic narrator18 tells 65

WO M E N A N D T H E N AT I O N

a story dealing with one or other aspect of their personality; but Sardari Begum is not able to speak about herself. In the fragmented multiple secondlevel narratives embedded within the main narrative, she is talked about by various characters in the film; but she cannot talk about herself. Even though the film tells the story of Sardari Begum, her narrative does not reach us from her point of view. Her being silenced by death is symbolic of the denial of voice and opportunities to tell her own story. The narrative structure of the film is ironical as it denies Sardari Begum, a singer, the narratorial voice to raise her own voice in Indian society.

Mammo (1994) Mammo19 is based on a real-life story written by Khalid Mohamed, the famous film critic, about his great-aunt. Its co-writers were Shama Zaidi and Javed Siddiqui and the music was composed by Vanraj Bhatia. Shyam Benegal read Khaled Mohammed’s piece and was so touched by the magnitude of human tragedy in the story that he decided to make a film about it. Benegal’s reaction to the story has been quoted by Sangeeta Dutta in her book. To quote: I was deeply moved by the story. It was one of the myriad human tragedies that took place in the aftermath of the Partition of India, tragic story of families torn apart by man-made borders and barriers. It was an exquisite miniature and in a microcosm expressed the trauma that had affected the entire subcontinent. (Benegal quoted by Datta 2008: 187) Mammo is the story of a middle-class Muslim widow and her metaphorical journey back to her roots. Mammo, the eponymous character of the film, was born at Panipat (now in Haryana, India but earlier a part of Punjab, India) before the partition of India. After marriage, she relocated to Lahore, Pakistan. After the death of her husband, owing to ill-treatment by her in-laws, she wants to return to her sister in Bombay [now Mumbai]. Her stay in India becomes problematic because of diplomatic ties with Pakistan and the rules of Indian bureaucracy. Towards the end of the film, Mammo is able to dupe Indian and Pakistani bureaucracy by twisting rules and documents to her advantage. John W. Hood reads Mammo like Suraj Ka Satwan Ghoda (Benegal 1992) to be rich in literary realism than cinematic realism. It is not that Hood is trying to make a point that stories like “Mammo” are more suitable for the verbal medium than cinematic, his point is that the narrative of the film remains under the influence of the verbal medium, but this is debatable. In Mammo, Shyam Benegal’s use of the language of cinema makes it a cinematically rich

66

WO M E N A N D T H E N AT I O N

film. Khalid Mohamed is the son of Zubeidaa, who once acted in Indian cinema. Through Mammo’s character, Benegal encapsulates the notions of “home” and “nation”; “insider”/ “outsider”. From a bureaucratic perspective, Mammo is a Pakistani woman who has been granted a visa for three months, which is extendable by 25 days. After its expiration, she is expected to leave India. Since she has decided to continue to live in India against the rules, she is forcibly sent back to Pakistan. But in Pakistan, she is not welcome by her in-laws after her husband’s death. In a state of utter loneliness and helplessness, she has nowhere to go but her sister’s home. The film begins with a series of montage showing frames of young Riyaz running frantically on the roads and the railway station, Mammo being forcibly taken away and other scenes of the film from Riyaz’s childhood interspersed with dark frames. In the beginning of the film, adult Riyaz (Rajit Kapoor) wakes from a disturbing dream. He gets up from his bed and begins to write the story of Mammo (Farida Jalaal), his grandmother’s sister who appeared in his dream. The adult Riyaz talks about Mammo to his grandmother, Fiyyazi (Surekha Sikri). She brings Mammo’s letters which Riyaz reads out aloud stating Mammo’s state of mind. Suddenly the doorbell rings. Riyaz goes to open the door, and the film observes an extradiegetic analepsis.20 The young Riyaz finds that an old woman named Mammo, his grandmother’s sister, has come to stay with them. Mammo feels at home with her sister in Bombay. In spite of Riyaz’s initial resistance, Mammo soon strikes up a friendly relationship with Riyaz, who is an adolescent boy on the point of manhood. Mammo becomes his friend, guide and confidante. Understanding the psychology of a growing boy, she makes Riyaz feel secure in her company. In her natural way, she also educates Riyaz on various aspects of understanding human nature. She shares her traumatic experience of the Partition and introduces the young Riyaz to progressive writers like Saadat Hasan Manto and Faiz Ahmed Faiz. Although she is warm and affectionate towards Riyaz yet she is nonetheless considered an “outsider” and called so on one occasion by irate Riyaz. Her sister’s silence on Riyaz’s remarks strengthens his position. Hurt by Riyaz’s behaviour and her sister’s silence, Mammo leaves the house. This imparts a final lesson to Riyaz as he realises his mistake once Mammo has left. Riyaz and his grandmother both look for Mammo and find her sitting at a shrine. Riyaz offers her an apology after which she agrees to return to the house. Soon after this, the police come and send Mammo forcibly back to Pakistan. After many years, the adult Riyaz wakes up after having dreamt about Mammo and starts writing her story. As a young boy, he had always wanted to write her story. He once shared his idea of writing a story about Mammo’s life with his friend, who is not intelligent enough to understand Riyaz’s viewpoint. Young Riyaz clearly expresses the idea of his story, which in turn also becomes the idea of the film, namely, everyone goes back to their roots.

67

WO M E N A N D T H E N AT I O N

Through two old sisters and Mammo’s relationship with young Riyaz, Benegal has raised multiple issues pertaining to identity, borders, the question of home for Muslim women and their status in India. The film is not only about a young boy’s coming to terms with his old aunt, who has suddenly appeared to stay with them in their small flat in Bombay; rather the film discusses the problems around the identity of a Muslim woman in post-colonial India. Mammo’s journey and struggle to stay in India are her attempts to go back to her roots. Mammo struggles to find her “home” in India after the Partition. She has become a foreigner in the country where she was born. Quite often, she talks about her desire to go back to her roots in the film. The pull of “watan ki mitti” – the homeland – is so strong in her that she comes back to her roots repeatedly. Her state of mind is aptly expressed by the Urdu couplet used in the film- Yeh kaisi sarhadey uljhi hui hai pairon mein? (What web of borders is tangled around my feet? ). But Mammo’s journey is not going to be easy, which is symbolically reflected when Riyaz and his grandmother bring angry Mammo back home from the shrine. Returning home, they encounter gusts of strong wind which made their homeward journey difficult, symbolic of Mammo’s journey in search of a home. In the next shot, she is sitting in front of the aquarium and reflecting that the fish inside the tank are safe as no one can throw them out of their home. The fish tank has been used as a metaphor in the film, which is highlighted in the mise-en-scène of the film. The fish tank not only divides the flat into two parts – Riyaz’s personal space and the other common space for all, the fish tank also becomes the metaphor of home in the film. Besides highlighting the fish tank by bringing it into the foreground, on a couple of occasions, Mammo has been shown talking to the fish. Mammo, identifying herself with the fish in the fish tank, sometimes wishes freedom for them and sometimes, she feels that the condition of the fish in the fish tank is better than her own condition. In her opinion, even if the fish are confined in a tank, they at least have a home of their own. The association between the fish and anxiety for home is similar to the anxiety of Punjabi diaspora shown in the play Kaamloops Dian Machhian (The Fish of Kaamploops) written by Atamjit Singh in which the fish become a metaphor of the anxiety to go back home. The playwright borrowed the idea from the behaviour pattern of the fish of Kaamloops that swim away from their birthplace throughout their lives, but before their death all the fish start swimming back towards their birth place. Mammo’s desire to go back to her roots cannot be seen as similar to what Atamjit Singh is referring to in his play as there are basic differences between Mammo’s circumstances and the condition of Punjabi diaspora in the West, but the fish aptly symbolise Mammo’s longing for home in the film. Intertextuality, provided by M.S. Sathyu’s Garam Hawa, further highlights the idea of the search for a home by Muslims in post-colonial India.

68

WO M E N A N D T H E N AT I O N

Riyaz, Mammo and Riyaz’s grand-mother go to watch a movie, which lends a cinematic frame by which to comment on the theme of home for Muslims in post-Partition India. Garam Hawa written by Ismat Chugtai and directed by Sathyu, looks at the Partition and migration of Muslims from India to Pakistan from the point of view of Muslims. Garam Hawa presents before the Indian audience the question of “home” for Muslims after the Partition. Muslims in the film hope that the sacrifice of Mahatma Gandhi would not be in vain and they will finally be accepted by Indian Hindus. The dream of being accepted by the Hindus, fear of accepting a new land (Pakistan) as their “home” and anxiety associated with it is central to the trauma and perils of the Partition and migration of Muslims, who were forced to migrate. Muslims, who were born in India and forced to migrate to Pakistan, were suddenly left homeless in their own homeland. Mammo too, in the film, is trying to stay in India (her home) like the protagonist of Garam Hawa, who decides to stay in India and embraces India’s problems by jumping into the protest march at the end of the film. The frame of intertextuality provided by Garam Hawa puts Mammo also in the category of Partition films, dealing with the question of home years after the Partition. Mammo does not tell us the story of the Partition, but it certainly brings to the surface the after effects of the Partition on Indian society. A two-nation theory created two countries for different communities, which has caused problems for the status of Muslims in India. Communal hatred sitting at the heart of violence of the Partition and the Hindutva ideology gaining currency in the country renders Muslims homeless in their own home and makes them outsiders in their own country. It is an unresolved issue of post-colonial India. Set years later, Mammo is a film that demonstrates how the Partition is not yet over. The survivors are still dealing with its fall-out as the two nation-states, India and Pakistan, play out their political tensions in a manner that heartlessly ignores the lives of individuals caught in the literal and metaphoric crossfire. (Bhaskar and Allen 2009: 311) The historical moment when this film was made makes the question of Muslims in Indian society more relevant. In December 1992 and January 1993, Bombay witnessed communal riots orchestrated against Muslims by the Shiv Sena, which also changed the character of the city afterwards.21 It was during the violent Bombay riots that a Muslim bakery was burnt down across the road and directly in front of the filmmaker, inciting Benegal to make a film about the status of Muslims in India. “There was an urgent questioning of the position of minorities and, in particular, Muslim identity” (Datta 2008: 186). Benegal wanted to raise people’s awareness of the issue of Muslim identity in the context of rising Hindu fundamentalism through his

69

WO M E N A N D T H E N AT I O N

medium. Mammo without portraying a single shot of riots on the streets of Bombay touches upon the issue of Muslims in Indian society and the filmmaker has also succeeded in questioning the idea of dividing a nation into two based on religion, which has produced fractured identities in India and Pakistan. By adding the frame of Garam Hawa and bringing in progressive writers like Manto and Faiz within the narrative, who have also questioned the idea of the Partition and the spread of violence during the Partition, Benegal raises the issue of identity politics, communal violence, two-nation theory and its adverse effects. The strength of the film lies in touching upon all the above-mentioned issues without making any melodramatic or propagandist statement against the Partition and the ensuing violence. The film seems to be an old woman’s struggle to find a “‘home” for herself. But when placed in the frame of the dislocation and dispossession of the Partition, the narrative of the film transcends an individual’s search for a home and becomes an allegorical search for the “home” of all the Muslims in postcolonial India. Benegal’s understanding of the communal violence (HinduMuslim conflict) is that it is not narrow, local or immediate; rather he finds the source of this problem rooted in the history. “The film-maker touches the issue of Muslim refugees in the city by tapping into the historical tragedy of partition” (Datta 2008: 193). The proponents of Hindutva perceive Muslim rulers, along with European colonisers, as “outsiders”. Within the Hindutva discourse the “otherization” of all the communities that have their origin outside modern Indian territory is generated. The central premise of the ideology of Hindutva is the creation of categories of “insider” and “outsider”.22 The process of re-writing or appropriating history from the Hindutva point of view, creates two categories – the Hindu “Self” and the Muslim “Other”. Benegal, who has been committed to telling narratives of minorities and the oppressed in Indian society, raised the question of the Muslim minority through the metaphor of “home” for the Muslims in India. “Without the benefit of any dramatic highs, the film-maker unobtrusively confronts the question of a land and its people torn apart by artificial borders” (Datta 2008: 191). Through the question of Mammo and her roots in India, Benegal has raised his voice for all the Muslims in India perceiving them not as outsiders, but as much insiders as any other religious or ethnic group of India. Maidul Islam has criticised Mammo on the grounds that this film also shows a stereotypical portrayal of Muslim women as burqa-clad Muslim women. The point Maidul Islam has missed here is that the signifiers of stereotypical characterisation cannot be claimed by the presence or absence of burqa,23 but on the overall characterisation and the role they play in the narrative. The strength of the film lies in the fact that it does not show a reified image of Muslims as regressive Nawabs or members of Muslim feudal society and terrorists; rather the film also shows the struggle of two ordinary middle-class Muslim women in Bombay. Mammo is shown as a victim of 70

WO M E N A N D T H E N AT I O N

the Partition, nationalism, patriarchy and bureaucracy. The questions raised in the film places Mammo in the league of movies such as Garma Hawa and stories like Toba Tek Singh, written by a progressive Urdu short-story writer named Saadat Hasan Manto. Mammo is also sensitive about the problems created by the Partition, which on the one hand resulted in giving new national identities to people; and on the other, uprooted people from the land they belonged to and they became diaspora in the new country given to them. The narrative of Mammo does not operate between stereotypical binary positions for Hindus and Muslims.24 The relationship of sisters between two middle-class Muslim women and Mammo’s search for “home” is symbolic of the condition of Muslims in India. In the battle of defining “Us” and “Them”, Benegal throws light on fundamental questions of the human condition in a society divided along communal lines. The question is how did Mammo (or read as Muslims), born in this land, suddenly become “Her” (“They”)? “Otherization” of Muslims not only pushes them to the margins but also makes them aliens in their own homeland. In the larger context of contemporary history, the story of Mammo becomes the narrative of “gendered narrative of dislocation and dispossession” (Datta 2008: 193). The historical frame given to the film and the moment (Bombay riots in 1992) when this film was made raise questions of the Muslim identity in contemporary India as a nation-state. Mammo’s search for home presents her life as the tragedy of misconstrued identity and is symbolic of the Muslim’s quest for “home” in post-colonial India imagined as a Hindu nation under Hindutva ideology.

Zubeidaa (2001) Zubeidaa is the last film in Shyam Benegal’s famous trilogy. The script of the film is written by Khaled Mohamed. The film is based on Khalid Mohamed’s discovery of his mother. The threads of the film are connected with Mammo. The little boy Riyaz in Mammo, who is brought up by his maternal grandmother and her sister, is told that his mother had died in an accident. When Riyaz grows up and becomes a journalist, he works on the life story of his mother. Letters, diary entries, conversations with people become his source to know his mother. Like Tehzeeb in Sardari Begum, he puts various pieces together to understand his mother’s narrative. His journey of the discovery of his mother determines the structure of the narrative in the film, which is quite similar to that of Sardari Begum. The narrative of Zubeidaa is also punctuated with various analepses and character-narrators. Each character in the film understands Zubeidaa from his/her own point of view. The film begins with Zubeidaa’s death and the young Riyaz attends his mother’s funeral. The adult Riyaz wants to know about his mother. The first analepsis tells about young, free-spirited Zubeidaa (Karishma Kapoor). 71

WO M E N A N D T H E N AT I O N

She grows up in a highly conservative atmosphere under the control of her father, Suleman Seth (Amrish Puri). She wants to work in films, but her dreams are curtailed by her father. One day, when Zubeidaa’s filming was in progress, her father arrives at the studio to take Zubeidaa back home. These incidents are narrated by the dance master (Shakti Kapoor). He also tells adult Riyaz about Zubeidaa’s love affair and also about another woman in Zubeidaa’s father’s life namely, Rosie or Rose (Lillete Dubey). Riyaz comes back to his house in Bombay where he lives with his grandmother. This is the same house seen in Mammo in which young Riyaz lived with his grandmother. His grandmother’s narration results in another analepsis narrating incidents related to Rose and young Zubeidaa. Zubeidaa’s mother Fayyazi tells incidents pertaining to Zubeidaa’s marriage. Zubeidaa’s father has arranged a party to welcome his friend, Sajid Masud (S.M. Zaheer). Rose, after dancing with Zubeidaa for a brief moment, introduces Zubeidaa to Sajid Masud’s son, Mehboob Alam (Vinod Sharawat). They both start dancing to which Zubeidaa’s father strongly objects. After this incident, he announces Zubeidaa’s marriage with Mehboob Alam. Zubeidaa tries to kill herself to protest against the marriage being imposed on her, but later on, under the pressure of the family she agrees to the marriage. While Zubeidaa is about to deliver her first baby, an unpleasant argument between Zubeidaa’s father and Sajid Masud takes place. The ego clash between Zubeidaa’s father and Mehboob Alam results in Zubeidaa’s divorce. Riyaz goes to Rose to know about her mother and her relationship with Zubeidaa. Rose tells him about Zubeidaa’s romance with the prince. According to Rose, unlike her timid mother, Zubeidaa was a strong woman. According to Rose, Zubeidaa was greatly unhappy after her divorce. Rose introduced Zubeidaa to Victor, the prince, or Vijendra Singh (Manoj Vajpayee). Their meeting resulted in the blossoming of romance between Zubeidaa and Victor. Soon in a ballroom, Victor proposed marriage to Zubeidaa. Shocked Zubeidaa could not reconcile with the unimagined chain of events. Zubeidaa was gradually encouraged by Rose. Zubeidaa’s mother was initially against the match. However, during her meeting with Vijendra Singh, she gave her consent for the marriage on one condition that Riyaz would stay with them. Zubeidaa went away with Victor to Fatehpur. Riyaz is reading his mother’s diary and he decides to go to Fatehpur. Her diary reveals various aspects of Zubeidaa’s life, her state of mind and her relationship with the prince. She was very much loved by him. Diary reading takes the narrative back to those times when Zubeidaa reached Fatehpur with Vijendra Singh. Zubeidaa is given a Hindu name, Meenakshi, after arriving at the palace. Vijendra Singh takes Zubeidaa to his first wife, Mandira Devi (Rekha). Soon Zubeidaa was introduced to the ways of the royal family, which she found too stifling for her. Vijendra Singh contests elections in the post-colonial India in order to retain power. He would always prefer

72

WO M E N A N D T H E N AT I O N

to take his first wife, who is also a Hindu woman, along with him on election campaigns. On one occasion, Zubeidaa becomes determined to accompany Vijendra Singh on one of his election campaigns. She forcibly boards the private plane of Vijendra Singh, against his wishes. As the fate would have desired it, the plane crashes and both Vijendra Singh and Zubeidaa die in the accident. The conflict between Zubeidaa’s father, Suleman Seth and his friend Masud echoes the question of Muslims in free India while making a statement about the status of those Muslims in Pakistan who had migrated from India. The way Zubeidaa’s marriage and divorce are orchestrated by her father also shows the stronghold of patriarchy in Indian society and Zubeidaa’s marriage with Vijendra Singh reflects the status of Muslim community vis-à-vis India as a nation-state. Initially, Zubeidaa was married against her will; later, forced divorce also resulted in unhappiness in her life. Zubeidaa’s mother is a submissive, silent woman in a Muslim patriarchal society, who lacks independence. Rose Davenport, a non-Muslim and a non-Hindu woman, is a dancer in the films. She is the opposite of what Zubeidaa’s mother stands for. If Fayyazi has imbibed the patriarchal values and has accepted her husband’s domineering position; Rose is flirtatious and knows how to use her charms to make that patriarch be more acquiescent. Zubeidaa, the next generation, prefers to live life on her own terms, but the strongholds of patriarchy do not allow her to do so. In her life, all major decisions are made by her father. Even after her marriage with Vijendra Singh, the customs of the royal palace determine the space she would enjoy in her private and public life. Zubeidaa stands as the spirit of the new generation of free India, trying to find her space, but always given new confinements determined by social norms of both Hindu and Muslim societies. Owing to her free spirited nature, she does not want to live like a silent animal in a household of men like her mother. In Zubeidaa’s personality, the seeds of new India can be seen. She dreams, she resists and eventually, she dies; and never enjoys the freedom she desired in her life. The dynamics of Vijendra Singh’s life represent another issue of newly free India. After India attained independence on August 15, 1947, not all the princely states were part of modern India. Vijendra Singh’s participating in electoral politics is a tactic to hold onto power in his constituency in modern democratic India. In his election campaigns, he always takes his first wife, a Hindu woman . Zubeidaa’s Muslim identity and her status of being the second wife reduces her space to the private sphere of Vijendra Singh, which Zubeidaa is not ready to accept. She forces her will on Vijendra Singh to accompany him on election campaigns. Vijendra Singh’s younger brother looks at Zubeidaa as nothing more than a mistress of Vijendra Singh. Firstly, being a woman, she is marginalised in a patriarchal and feudal arrangement; secondly, being a Muslim woman. Mandira Devi’s calling Zubeidaa by the name of “M” also signifies a reduction in Zubeidaa’s identity. She

73

WO M E N A N D T H E N AT I O N

is initially given a Hindu identity, which takes away her Muslim identity; later, she is reduced to a simple letter – “M”. Her Muslim identity denies her various rights that Mandira Devi was enjoying. Zubeidaa’s status and subsequent marginalisation in Vijendra Singh’s home represents the homelessness of women in general and Muslim women in particular in India. The film touches upon social and political issues that India as a young nation was confronting. The timeframe of Zubeidaa’s narrative spans a couple of years before and after the Partition. The fragmented history of Zubeidaa is intertwined with the history of India. The status of princely states at the time of India’s independence of India was a diplomatic issue confronting the rest of India. Vijendra Singh plays the role of Hanwant Singh Rathore, the titular Maharaja of Jodhpur. Hanwant Singh Rathore became the Raja of Jodhpur in June, 1947, after the death of his father, the Maharaja of Jodhpur. Hanwant Singh Rathore remained the titular Raja from June, 1947 to January 26, 1952, when he was killed in a plane crash. Vijendra Singh’s relationship with Zubeidaa in the film can be interpreted in the historical context of newly independent India when India as a nation-state was dealing with the question of the princely states. The princely states of India before independence were under the suzerainty of the Crown. The princely state of Jodhpur signed the accession to join the Indian Union on April 7, 1949. The principle of suzerainty denied the princely states the right to take decisions on various issues. Consequently, these princely states did not enjoy full autonomy. Zubeidaa as an individual and as a woman is ruled over by external forces (her father), which results in her individual sovereignty being compromised. Zubeidaa does not enjoy full control and autonomy over her body, mind or relationships. Vital life decisions such as career, marriage, even divorce, were taken by her father and in which she had no authority. As the status of some of the princely states in India after their political integration continues to cause tension within the Indian state, the Muslim identity of Zubeidaa became an issue in the household of Vijendra Singh. Zubeidaa being a Muslim woman, asserting herself in the household of Vijendra Singh, is analogous to the identity assertions of the Muslim minority in free India, which pose certain questions to Indian democracy and India as a nation-state. Vijendra Singh’s marrying a Muslim woman is akin to appropriating Muslim minority in the state politics. Vijendra Singh under the pressures of electoral politics has accepted someone from the Muslim minority group, but his acceptance is circumscribed and limited as he cannot take her out in the political sphere. While campaigning for the elections, he prefers his Hindu wife to accompany him. Zubeidaa refuses to comply with and become invisible. She asserts her position in his life, which can be read as a statement of the Muslim presence in the Indian nation-state. Zubeidaa’s story, therefore, becomes a political allegory of post-colonial India in which certain questions have been left unresolved, but they continue to disrupt Indian democracy. Sunil Khilnani 74

WO M E N A N D T H E N AT I O N

in his book The Idea of India discusses such unresolved political issues facing Indian democracy. Zubeidaa, the woman, is the embodiment of all such issues in Indian history. Made after the Bombay riots of 1992, the trilogy of Mammo, Sardari Begum and Zubeidaa raise the question of the Muslim in India in which the Hindutva ideology was gaining currency. In all three films, the concept of home emerges as a potent metaphor. The female protagonists in all three films are searching for a home for themselves. Every woman’s situation and circumstances are different. Mammo is a direct victim of the Partition and new borders have made her own homeland a foreign country to her; Sardari Begum leaves her father’s home to pursue music. Disowned by the men of the family, she works independently to create space for herself in the society. Shoma Chatterjee opines that these female protagonists are marginalised on three grounds: firstly, they are women and hence marginalised in a maledominated society; secondly, they are Muslims and thirdly, they are Muslim women. In the films discussed in this chapter, Benegal has not only raised the issue of a marginalised community but also shown their strength of character. Women characters in these narratives have a strong spirit. Usha in Bhumika suffers, but she shows the determination and courage to face her life and loneliness independently; all the females in Mandi meet the challenges of life head-on and look directly into the eyes of adversities; the three Muslim women featured in the trilogy refuse to submit and yield before their difficult circumstances. In a subtle and nuanced manner, Benegal has brought to surface the challenges faced by a changing India from its independence until 2001. Taking account of the time period of these films, as they span over 70 years, from the 1930s to 2001, Benegal has raised issues of women’s status and changing roles in the Indian patriarchal society; the issue of women’s sexuality, their identity, the status of courtesans and thumri singers in postcolonial India and the question of being Muslim in saffron India in order to question the status of women in a male-dominated India.

Notes 1 The idea of Performance of Nation is borrowed from Jisha Menon’s work who has studied various expressions of nationalism through representation in different art forms. Besides studying drama as a literary form, Jisha Menon has studied the “drama” of the retreat ceremony at the Wagha border. For details, see Jisha Menon, The Performance of Partition: India, Pakistan and the Memory of Partition, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2012. 2 Historically speaking, the benefits of various Reform Acts were first extended to men. After the elite, the benefits of various legislative reforms trickled down from the middle-class to the working-class men. Women were accorded the benefits only after every class of man had been. The history of nineteenth-century Europe exemplifies that while deciding the rights and responsibilities of a citizen in what was then considered a modern state, women were not initially considered to

75

WO M E N A N D T H E N AT I O N

3

4 5

6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13

14 15

be equal to men. Napoleonic laws were highly oppressive against women. The benefits of the reforms of 1832 in Great Britain were extended to men belonging to the middle class; the 1867 Reform Act extended the right to vote to the working-class men in industrial towns and cities, the 1884 Reform Act gave the working-class men and peasant men in rural areas the right to vote. Women were given the right to vote much later in the twentieth century, and as late as 1918 in Norway and Britain. Fareed Kazmi and Sanjeev Kumar in their article entitled “The Politics of Muslim Identity and Nature of Public Imagination in India: Media and Films as Potential Determinants” find correlation between privatisation and the revival of Hindutva ideology, with which I do not entirely agree. However, they have made an interesting observation about the nexus between political economy and communal politics as, according to them, the benefits of privatisation were reaped mainly by the Hindu middle class. The point they fail to catch is that the polarisation of Indian society did not start with the privatisation of the Indian economy but during the British colonial period. “Essentials of Hindutva”, the ideological pamphlet of Hindutva, was published in 1923. The pamphlet was retitled as “Hindutva- Who is a Hindu?” It was republished in 1928. The ideology of Hindutva controversially co-opts Sikhism, Buddhism and Jainism (religions that originated in India) under the umbrella concept of Hindus, but Islamists and Christians (which originated elsewhere) are perceived as aliens or outsiders. Analepsis (plural form is analepses), as defined by Gerald Prince is a temporal “anachrony going back to the the past with respect to the present moment”. For details, see Gerald Prince, A Dictionary of Narratology. C.H. Atma had sung famous songs such as “Pritam Aan Milo”, the famous song of 1945. The title of the film also recalls the famous Hindi film, Main Tusli Tere Angan Ki, a Hindi film based on a Marathi novel, Ashi Tujhi Preet by Chandrakant Kakodkar. The cinematic image has two dimensions to it – the visual and the sonic, which are called the Visual-Image and the Sound-Image. Michel Chion, A. Thoma, and Daniel Percheron and Marcia Butzel have worked on sound. Borrowed from Karen Leonard’s article. Arbab in Arabic means Chief or Master and Nishat means Night. Karen Leonard has mentioned it as Department of Enjoyment. Daily practice of Indian classical, semi-classical and light singers. Ruth Vanita says that the word tawaif is Persian, but the practice of courtesans in this land has been there since ancient times. Terms like Devdasis, Ganika, Nagarvadhu signify the presence of courtesans in ancient India. Chitralekha during the Mauraya Empire, Vasantsena in the fifth century and Vaishali in the sixth century were famous courtesans in ancient India. During the medieval period, courtesans or court-dancers or raqqasa, as they were called, received the patronage of the emperor. After the decline of the Mughal empire in the eighteenth century, as Lucknow emerged the centre of politics and culture, courtesans thrived under the patronage of the Nawab. Courtesans or tawaif of Lucknow were supposed to be the custodians of the culture and finesse of the culture of Awadh. These courtesans were well trained in the art of classical music, dance and poetry. They have made a significant contribution in the development of Hindustani music. As defined by Gerard Genette. All India Radio conceived the policy that all female singers of Indian classical music who had “bai” as a suffix to their names should marry a respectable

76

WO M E N A N D T H E N AT I O N

16 17 18 19 20

21 22 23 24

man and become “devi”. They were allowed to sing on the radio only after they had undergone this transformation and moral cleansing. Begum Akhtar, the famous ghazal and thumri singer, was transformed from Akhtari Bai Faizabadi to Begum Akhtar only after she married a Lucknow-based barrister, Ishtiqad Ahmed Abbasi.Begum Akhtar and M.S. Subhalakshmi are among the rare reallife examples. But Umrao Jaan Ada’s narrative throws light on the other aspect of the story. She has a strong urge to go back home, but she is not accepted by her brother. She is left with no other hospitable place, but her Kotha. Begum Akhtar is a befitting example to understand this phenomenon. Translation is mine. A narrator who is present in the narrative. The author has published an article titled “Identity Politics and the Muslim Other: A Study of Shyam Benegal’s Mammo” in Brukenthalia, Sibiu. This chapter uses the material published therein. An anachrony in which narrative goes back to the past in relation to the present time in the narrative. It is popularly known as flashback. Extradiegetic analepsis is a kind of analepsis in relation to the first narrative. For details, read Gerard Genette or Gerald Prince. Based on Arvind Unni’s paper presented at a conference. Arvind has studied the representation of the “Muslim Space” in Indian cinema. See details in the references. This refers to the debate if Aryans were indigenous or they were outsiders. The scholars of Hindutva do not subscribe to the thesis in history that Aryans were also outsiders. Burqa is Urdu for the veil that Muslim women wear. There are films made in the 1990s in which simple binary positions of the Muslim terrorist can be seen.

77

3 POLITICAL COMMENTARIES THROUGH ADAPTATIONS

Shyam Benegal has adapted a good number of literary, fictional and nonfictional works since the early days of his career. Ankur is an adaptation of a story he wrote when he was a student; Mandi is based on a story written by Ghulam Abbas; Bhumika is an adaptation of a memoir; Kondura has been adapted from a Marathi novel and Samar is based on real incidents narrated in Harsh Mander’s book. Benegal has been closely associated with literary and theatre personalities such as Vijay Tendulkar, Girish Karnad, Habib Tanvir and Satyadev Dubey, which alludes to his constant association with literary personalities in his filmmaking career. Films based on a fictional or non-fictional work, which have been discussed in other chapters from a different point of view, have not been included in this chapter. Moreover, this chapter will attempt to examine films within the frame of adaptation studies to understand how these films are interpreted according to the sociopolitical context in which they were made. This chapter focuses on films made from 1975 to the early 1990s in which the filmmaker revisits the epic genre (Kalyug, an adaptation of the Mahabharata), folk-tales (Charandas Chor, based on a Rajasthani folk-tale), historical fiction (Junoon, based on A Flight of Pigeon by Ruskin Bond) and a novel written immediately after India’s independence (Suraj Ka Saatvan Ghoda, based on a novel with the same title) to understand the past and present India. The rationale of this chapter is that films discussed in the chapter make a political commentary on the various issues that India was confronting during that period. Benegal does not merely retell stories in the visual medium; he has interpreted the source works by relocating them in the contemporary socio-political context. He engages with the history and culture of India to comment on contemporary politics, the moral crisis of the nation, the power dynamics and gender politics in modern India. Adaptation is the process of transmutation and transformation “when a text belonging to one medium is transformed into another medium using a different sign system” (Sachdeva 2017: xiv). Owing to their ontological differences, verbal signs operate differently from visual signs. Verbal signs, being symbolic in nature, demand imagination from readers; whereas visual 78

P O L I T I C A L C O M M E N TA R I E S T H RO U G H A DA P TAT I O N S

signs, being iconic in nature, are directly visible.1 In other words, the verbal signs are conceived; whereas visual signs are perceived. Both media work according to their respective aesthetic and cultural system while telling stories. As cinema has its own language, tropes and modes of narration, the same story is told in a different fashion when adapted into a film. Hence, changes during adaptation are inevitable. During film adaptation, events are dislocated in time2 and space adopting different modes of narration. Adaptation studies has moved away from the anxiety of the fidelity to the source work as expressed by George Bluestone. Linda Hutcheon’s idea of adaptation as interpretation; Julie Sanders’s categories of adaptation and appropriation and Kamilla Elliott’s new debates in literature/film relationships explore new dimensions of the relationship between literature and film in different ways. Every adaptation is different in nature and scope. Adaptation can also involve a free and creative play of the new medium, opines Linda Hutcheon. Since every adaptation interprets literature into a new medium, every adaptation is original, claims Robert Stam. Adaptation is a process through which a dialogue between two mediums, two artists and the aesthetics of two art forms is established. Bluestone thinks that it establishes an “affective relationship between creative artist and receptive audience” (Bluestone 1957: 1). Every adaptation, “like the work it adapts, is always framed in a context – a time and a place, a society and a culture; it does not exist in a vacuum” (Hutcheon 2006: 142). The socio-cultural context can vary even if the adaptation is made within the same country but in a different time period. The meaning of any art form – literature, films, or paintings – lies in the interaction between text and context. Placing the adaptation in the new context, new interpretations of the old texts are made. Adaptation recontextualises an old text in the new context to establish its relevance in the present. The adapter’s exploration of the political, ethical and aesthetical dimension of adaptation is crucial “to re-interpret a source text” (Sanders 2006: 2). Thus, adaptation is simultaneously a creative as well as a critical activity. The “doubled definition of adaptation as a product [. . .] and as a process [. . .] is one way to address the various dimensions of the broader phenomenon of adaptation” (Hutcheon 2006: 22). Since adaptation places renowned literary texts in the domain of popular culture, the process of adaptation assumes two hypothetical spectators. The first category expects to maintain some semblance of fidelity “while at the same time remaining intelligible to the spectator unfamiliar with the film’s source” (Orr 1985: 4).3 The implied viewer of a film is different from the implied reader of literature. In the second category, the task of a filmmaker is to communicate his story even to the viewer who has not read the source work. In such cases, film adaptations circulate narratives among larger audiences without making them conscious of the original work. This aspect of film adaptation becomes crucial if the implied viewer of the film is a child,4 79

P O L I T I C A L C O M M E N TA R I E S T H RO U G H A DA P TAT I O N S

or someone who cannot read the source work in the original language.5 The film adaptation in such cases breaks the barrier of literacy, age and culture. In this chapter, the focus is to understand the negotiations between cinema and the various cultural narratives of India. In addition, there is an attempt to understand what ideologies of nation and nationalism these adaptations have propagated; how India has been re-imagined by the filmmaker during adaptation and what comment these adaptations make on the contemporary India of that time. Each adaptation discussed in this chapter performs a different function and comments on a different political dimension of India. Junoon, is adapted from a novella written by Ruskin Bond. It was a film for an “Indian audience” in the context of the mutiny of 1857 which narrates the shifting power centres, gender issues and failing responsibilities. Charandas Chor is made for children, but is an allegory of the political situation of its times and Kalyug, said to be an adaptation of the Mahabharata in modern times, comments on the relevance of the epic in modern times. Both Charandas Chor and Kalyug are set in the context of the Emergency imposed in 1975. Suraj Ka Saatvan Ghoda is an adaptation of a novel by Dharamvir Bharti through which the filmmaker engages with new gender roles in the context of modernity.

Junoon (1978) Junoon (1978) is an adaptation of the novella titled A Flight of Pigeons by Ruskin Bond. The novella is based on a true story that Bond had heard from his father. Set against the backdrop of the Mutiny of 1857, the novella is a story of “humanity of the most of the people involved – for in times of conflict and inter-religious or racial hatred, there are always a few (just a few) who are prepared to come to the aid of those who are unable to defend themselves” (Bond 2007: viii). Against the backdrop of violence, Ruskin Bond tells of a love story, which Benegal narrates in cinematic form. There are some differences between the novella and the film in terms of characters, arrangement of events and point of view, which extend its point of discussion. Bond’s A Flight of Pigeons is a story of the survival of British women and the strength shown by a white woman in the wake of violence. Bond’s novella begins with outbreak of the mutiny at Meerut and then shifts to a small place called Shahjahanpur near the River Khannaut. Javed Khan, a Rohilla Pathan, is introduced with elements of criminality about him. Redman’s bungalow has been burnt, which has failed to alarm the British. While young lieutenant Scott strums on the guitar and Mrs. Ricketts and Mr. Jenkins, the collector, are discussing the weather over a drink, it is only Labadoors who “had foreboding of trouble” (Bond 2007: 3). Mrs. Labadoor is mixed race. She was born to a French father and a Muslim mother, who hailed from Rampur. She married to Labadoor, an unassuming clerk at the office of the Magistrate, at the age of 18 and had a daughter, Ruth. When 80

P O L I T I C A L C O M M E N TA R I E S T H RO U G H A DA P TAT I O N S

the news of violence at Meerut reaches them, Mrs. Labadoor proposes to miss Sunday mass, but Ruth insists on attending it. To this point, the narrative has been by a third person narrator. From this point, the third person narrator becomes Ruth Labadoor. Seen from her point of view, it becomes Ruth’s narrative. Ruth gives a detailed account of the attack on her father and other British people at the church. With death and bloodshed is all around, Ruth is helped by Lala Ramjimal, a Kayastha by caste. Ruth, her mother and six other family members – Granny, Anet, Ruth’s cousin; Pillo, Ruth’s mother’s half-brother; Pillo’s mother and two servants, Champa and Lado, along with two spaniels in a mud hut. They are helped by two working-class men: Triloki and Chinta. From Triloki’s hut, they move to Lalaji’s house. Ruth, as a narrator, describes the low-roofed mud house of Lalaji and the women in his family. Her narrative gives an account of the ordeal she, her mother and the other women had to endure. Ruth’s mother is portrayed as a strong, brave woman. She fights like a tigress when required. She withstands the pressure at Lalaji’s house and later, also at Nawab’s house. When Nawab’s men come to take Ruth away, her mother stands like a wall between men and Ruth. Her fierce body language is both magnificent and terrifying. Having to manage hostile circumstances at the hands of Muslim Nawabs in the novella, Ruth’s mother is forced to invent strategies for her family’s survival. Ruth’s mother gave Muslim names to each member of her family because of the heritage she inherits. Miriam, Ruth’s mother, maintains her calm, inner strength and fortitude in the face of the adversary when they are held captive by Javed Khan. In the novella, Javed Khan admires Ruth. The mutiny affords him the best opportunity to claim her by forcibly bringing her, along with her family, to his house. From Ruth’s point of view, Javed Khan’s attraction for her is no more than an infatuation for the young white lady. Miriam, living up to her name (Miriam is the equivalent of Mary in Islamic mythology and acts as the archetypal mother figure in the novella), protects her daughter like the “mother-figure”. The political backdrop of 1857, in which the Moghul Emperor on the throne of Delhi, is surrounded by Muslim feudal lords who oppose the East India Company is represented by Javed Khan’s fascination and desire to possess a white female body. The premise is allegorical of the political battle to reclaim the territory occupied by the British. Ruth, born to Mariam (later changed to Miriam) and Mr. Labadoor, is now a firangan in Javed Khan’s and others’ eyes. Her mixed heritage, dominated by her European identity, represents the land which was initially part of the Muslim (Mughal) empire, now governed by European colonial forces. It is over Ruth’s body the politics of power is being played. Mariam, or now Miriam, bargains over Ruth’s body like a diplomat. “‘Then let Delhi decide our future,’ said Mother” (Bond 2007: 68). Making Ruth a war trophy, she bargains with Javed Khan that he could claim Ruth if Indians win Delhi in the 81

P O L I T I C A L C O M M E N TA R I E S T H RO U G H A DA P TAT I O N S

Mutiny but if the British win the battle, he would have no right to ask for Ruth’s hand. In the narrative, sharply defined identities and points of view are the fulcrum around which the film develops. Along with religious identities, Ruth also takes pains to mention the caste and class of different people. Lala Ramjimal is a Kayastha, Triloki and Chinta are respectively a mason and labourer; Javed Khan is a Rohilla Pathan, a ruffian feared by both the English women and Lala Ramjimal’s family. From Ruth’s point of view, Javed Khan is a ruffian; a Nawab with a suggestion of the criminal about him, but the women in his family are not hostile. Women are sympathetic towards one another despite their different racial and religious identities. Lala Ramjimal is shown to be loyal to the family of Labadoors. Keeping the identity of Ruth, the intra-diegetic narrator, and Anglo-Indian identity of Ruskin Bond in mind, the whole narrative looks at the events of 1857 and the ordeal of the Labadoors from the Anglo-Indian point of view. In the verbal narrative with first-person narration, characterisation is influenced by the question of who is supportive of Ruth, Mariam and the other British people. Identitarian biases and prejudices do not paint all Muslims and other communities in one light, as towards the end, Nasim Khan and Sikh, who are loyal to the British, are not portrayed as evil. It is towards the end that Ruth, the narrator, admits as a young female that she had developed an admiration for the Nawab, who had “a streak of nobility” (Bond 133). Narrated from the point of a young British female, the novella tells the story of survival of white women in times of political turmoil and bloodshed. Changing political orders result in changing power equations between Javed Khan and Mariam (or Miriam). From the domestic space of Lalaji’s or Javed Khan’s house, the women protected themselves from exploitation, dishonour and death by whatever strategy they could. Even though the intended objective of the narrative is to focus on those who champion the weak in violent times, the film tends to emphasise the British experience. The focus of Bond’s narrative has been so much on Ruth and her mother that it becomes more of Mariam’s story. In the verbal narrative, while men were fighting on the battlefield, Mariam is a single intelligent, smart and strong white woman who successfully fought her personal battle. Mariam, the daughter of a French adventurer, not only outwitted Javed Khan, but also outperformed him by showing her superior mental strength which perhaps is intended to suggest mental superiority of Europeans over Indians. Her story glorifies the strength and courage shown by a European woman, which is narrated by a young European girl (with mixed blood running in her veins) and written by an Anglo-Indian writer in post-colonial India. Benegal adapts Bond’s novella and transforms it into an “Indian film”. This was the first of Benegal’s films in which he used a star cast. Shashi Kapoor was an established star when he acted in this film, and he was also the film’s producer. The screenplay of the film was written by Benegal, 82

P O L I T I C A L C O M M E N TA R I E S T H RO U G H A DA P TAT I O N S

dialogues were written by Satyadev Dubey and Ismat Chugtai. Cinematography was handled by Govind Nihalani and the music composed by Vanraj Bhatia. Both the beginning and ending of the film are different from the novella. Unlike Bond’s preface where he overtly states the purpose of the novella, Benegal establishes the historical context with the help of subtitles. The film begins with Amir Khusro’s famous Qawwali with Indo-Islamic architectural monuments in the backdrop. Instead of focusing on the British officers, the opening scene of the film concentrates on the syncretic culture of India. As the Qawwali begins, a flock of pigeons takes flight from the monument. Benegal introduces the metaphor of pigeons in the beginning of the film, which appear quite late in the novella. Hindu and Muslim soldiers of the East India Company enjoy the divine music being sung in front of a fakir. The fakir makes a prophecy that the end of the British rule in India is near, as they would fly like pigeons. Javed Khan (Shashi Kapoor) has already begun to admire Ruth Labadoor (Nafisa Ali). Ruth, aware of this, shares this with her father (Tom Alter) and mother, Mariam (Jennifer Kendal). Javed Khan stalks her and, unlike the novella, Ruth is traumatised by Javed Khan in the beginning of the film. The following morning, Ruth goes to church with her father where they are attacked by mutineers. Her father is killed and terrified, Ruth runs towards her house where Lala Ramjimal (Kulbhushan Kharbanda) takes her to a safer place and then takes Ruth, her mother and granny (Ismat Chugtai) to his house. Compared to the novella, there are only three members of the Labadoor family in the film narrative. From Lala Ramjimal, Javed Khan forcibly takes them all to his house Then begins the tension of a love triangle between Javed Khan, his wife (Shabana Azmi) and Ruth Labadoor, an aspect less explored in the novella. Benegal uses cinematic language to show the mounting tension among the three through the image-sound montage. There are only visuals as no dialogues have been used, except a song about love and passion on the sound track. During the night, Javed Khan leaves his wife and stands outside the room where Ruth and the other two women are sleeping. On the soundtrack the song Ishq Ne Todi Sar Pe Qyammat is being played. Protecting Ruth, Mariam holds her tight. Javed Khan is standing behind the chic screen and his wife is standing in the background. The next shot shows a flock of pigeons flying in the sky and a few outside the room in which Ruth is staying. In Bond’s narrative, white pigeons flying with dark clouds as the backdrop symbolise white Europeans in the dark land of India. Benegal, on the other hand, uses the pigeons to impart wider Indian cultural connotations. They are an integral part of the Muslim household.6 Domesticating pigeons and organising flight competitions have been a part of the Nawab’s culture in the Awadh. Besides, Pigeons’ flight is also symbolic as they take flight to look for their mating partner. They become a symbol of passion or junoon in the film. Javed Khan loves his pigeons so much that he is even accused of 83

P O L I T I C A L C O M M E N TA R I E S T H RO U G H A DA P TAT I O N S

loving birds at the expense of his duties towards his motherland. His love for white pigeons/doves extends to Ruth, a white woman. While Javed Khan is fondling a white pigeon in the courtyard, Ruth wearing a white gown appears on the balcony. Ruth in her innocence starts playing with pigeons. Javed Khan, with passion in his eyes, looks at Ruth. Their eyes meet for a moment with other stanzas of the song Ishq Ne Todi Sar Pe Qyamat on the soundtrack. Javed Khan’s wife appears on the opposite balcony making the triangle complete with two women standing in their respective balconies and Javed Khan in the courtyard, standing between them. Observing that Ruth has seen his wife, Javed Khan leaves the scene. Javed Khan pressurises Mariam to agree to his marriage with Ruth, which she handles quite cleverly keeping her nerves cool. As described in the novella, Mariam is sometimes aggressive and sometimes, tactful. Like a shrewd negotiator, she bargains with Javed Khan over his right to marry Ruth, linking it with the battle of Delhi. Ruth’s body becomes the site of diplomacy, desire and conflict in which Javed Khan, a Muslim man, and Mariam, a white woman, equally participate. In the domestic space, Mariam fights another battle. When her mother dies, she ensures that her mother is given a Christian funeral. While staying at Javed Khan’s house as his captive, she is able to negotiate to claim her space without compromising. The domestic space of Javed Khan represents the political space of Hindustan in which the European forces first came as traders and then succeeded in claiming territory, gradually increasing their control over the social and political spheres. Set against the backdrop of the mutiny of 1857, the decisive battle which ended the old socio-political order and resulted in the British taking full control, it is a narrative of shrinking Hindustani space in India. Benegal has maintained the third-person narration throughout the film. Instead of giving the film narrative Ruth’s point of view, Benegal has seen the whole episode of political upheaval and violence through the points of view of women, including women in Javed Khan’s house. Ruth’s narration in the novella is replaced by the third-person narrator to include the point of view of women in the narrative, irrespective of their religious identity. Benegal’s Javed Khan is not a ruffian or a criminal, in contrast to his character in the novella; nor is he a hero of 1857. He is a Pathan who is infatuated with Ruth Labadoor and is compelled to win her. Ruth begins to like him, gradually. Towards the end, Bond’s novella suggests that Ruth appreciated Javed Khan’s concealed nobility. Benegal has extended this aspect further and suggested a love story. Defeated in the battle against the British, Javed Khan goes to the church to see Ruth for the last time. Against the wishes of her mother, Ruth comes out of the church to see him. She is smiling whilst looking at him. He looks at her; takes a few steps backwards and departs. Another verse of Amir Khusro – Chal Khusro Ghar Aapne – is played. The narrator tells of Javed’s martyrdom for his part in the battle. Ruth dies 55 years later, having never wed. In Bond’s novella nobody knows of the 84

P O L I T I C A L C O M M E N TA R I E S T H RO U G H A DA P TAT I O N S

final whereabouts of Javed Khan. These departures from the original work expand the scope of the film narrative. Javed Khan emerges as a hero, grows as a lover and the film narrative explores the possibilities of love in the wake of hatred and violence. The polyphonic narrative of the film includes the voice of Indian rebels fighting against the rule of the East India Company. Sarfarz Khan (Naseeruddin Shah) exposes the inhuman acts and atrocities committed by the British on Indians. He represents the anger of Indians who stood against the rule of the East India Company. The film shows Sarfarz Khan holding meetings with other men of influence after their defeat in Kanpur. It includes scenes of the battlefield; the defeat of Indians on the battlefield. The defeated Sarfarz Khan’s army is juxtaposed with a procession of Urs passing through the town. Irate and frustrated, Sarfaraz Khan starts striking the pigeons of Javed Khan. He is critical of Javed Khan paying more attention to his white pigeons and the white girl than the matters of politics. Javed Khan’s indulgence in his pigeons is symbolic of the decadence and culture of indulgence among the feudal elites, one major factor behind the success of the British in India.7 Benegal accords multiple connotations to the metaphor of pigeons in the film. As in the novella, white pigeons represent the British in the film too. Moreover, in the film, they also become a metaphor of Islamic cultural practices and Javed Khan’s passion and growing frustration. Benegal, as a filmmaker and interpreter of the source work, is able to add multiple voices by exploring the historical context in more detail. By using Qawwali, the extended character of Fakir, women’s point of view, details of the house of Javed Khan, pigeons as metaphors, scene of the battlefield, reference to the soldiers of Nana Sahib and love between Javed Khan and Ruth, Benegal has given the narrative historical and cultural frames, which do not exist in the novella. Benegal, even while making a film based on the historical context of 1857, the first battle of independence for India, shies away from jingoistic nationalism and transcreates the original work into a narrative of love. Making nationalism and the performative violence associated with it an enterprise of men, the narrative critiques violence in the name of the country from women’s perspective. Benegal’s film is a creative extension exploring women’s point of view, humanity and love when violence is spread loose.

Charandas Chor (1975) Charandas Chor, an adaptation of a Rajasthani folktale penned by Vijaydan Detha, tells the story of Charandas Chor or Charandas, the thief, an honest thief who dies fulfilling five vows given to his guru. The story has been adapted for theatre by the famous theatre director of India, Habib Tanvir, who is known for his work with the tribals from Chhattisgarh. In cinema, another folk-tale by Vijaydan Detha titled “Duvidha” has been adapted 85

P O L I T I C A L C O M M E N TA R I E S T H RO U G H A DA P TAT I O N S

by Mani Kaul and Amol Palekar titled Dividha and Paheli respectively. Each adaptation of folktale by Vijaydan Detha has its aesthetics, implied viewer and can refute the accusation of “homogenizing cultural expressions through the mass media” (Koven 2008: 4). Charandas Chor is a children’s film directed by Shyam Benegal. It was produced by the Children’s Film Society of India. The film was written by Benegal and Shama Zaidi, lyrics of the film by Habib Tanvir and the music was provided by Nand Kishore Mittal. Charandas Chor is a comic satire which exposes the hypocrisy and corruption prevalent in society. It is difficult to say what came first – the film or the play – as both were evolving simultaneously. Tanvir, during his workshop held at Bhilai in November– December, 1974, was working on a story based on a Rajasthani folk-tale written by Vijaydan Detha or Bijju, as he was called by his friends, in which a thief was the protagonist. After having staged five plays of the workshop, Tanvir announced to the audience that he was going to perform another play, but the play was a work-in-progress. The play was performed in which Tanvir himself came on stage on occasion to make some corrections; he sang songs and corrected his actors as well. The play was appreciated by the audience. At this stage, the play was called Chor Chor and later it was called Charandas Chor. A few months before the Bhilai workshop, Benegal made a documentary film on Naya Theatre. When Tanvir shared with him his idea of staging a play on the story of a thief, Benegal immediately decided to make a film on the same subject. The film was to be produced by the Children’s Film Society, India. As a director, he was not very happy with the ending of the play. He thought that the ending of the play, with Charandas’s death, was not suitable for children. He wanted to add another scene after Charandas’s death. The scene of heaven, in which Charandas and Buddhu are standing in front of Chitragupta and Yamaraj thus became part of the film. In Tanvir’s words (which I translate), “The film got ready earlier than the play. Now when I look back, I realize that I could not do away with the influence of the film on my play” (Tanvir 2004: 13).8 The main characters of the film are Charandas (Lalu Ram) and his apprentice, Buddhu Dhobi (Madan Lal). The police are trying to catch both of them, but they manage to escape by taking refuge from an ascetic, a spiritual guru (Thakur Ram). The guru asks Charandas to renounce a few things in order to become his disciple. Charandas renounces four things and vows to the guru that he would not lead any procession held in his honour; he would not eat from a plate of gold or silver; he would not marry a princess and he would not become a king, suspecting that none of them were likely in any case. His guru asks him to take another vow that he would never tell a lie in his life. Having given five vows to his guru, Charandas leaves his guru’s place. He becomes a known thief. He would tell everyone he meets that he is Charandas Chor or Charandas, the thief, which nobody would believe. 86

P O L I T I C A L C O M M E N TA R I E S T H RO U G H A DA P TAT I O N S

As fate would have it, Charandas encounters the Princess (Smita Patil). Charandas is caught and brought before her. On being asked, Charandas honestly confesses that he has stolen five gold coins, not ten. Impressed with his honesty, she sends a caravan of horses and elephants to bring Charandas to her. Charandas refuses to lead a procession in his honour. Instead, he is brought in front of the Princess tied with ropes. The Princess offers him fruits and food from a plate of gold. Charandas, recalling his second vow, refuses to eat from it. The Princess becomes enraged and sends him to prison. The Princess is smitten by Charandas’s honesty and his innocent charm so much that she proposes marriage to him, offering him the opportunity to become King. Charandas refuses both the offers. Now the irate Princess has him killed. In heaven, Charandas stands before Chitragupta (Sadhu Meher). Because Buddu has been following his mentor, he also enters heaven. Discreetly, Buddhu tears off the page on which Charandas’s name was written as being among the dead. Stealing the Oxen of Yamaraj, the Hindu god of death, the pair returns to earth. The film ends on a comic note as three policemen chase Charandas and Buddhu while a donkey stands still in the frame, looking on. Charandas Chor is not the first film based on the life of a thief in Indian cinema.9 Charandas Chor, because of its protagonist and treatment of the subject, belongs to a different category than mainstream films about thieves. Charandas Chor, as a film, neither glorifies thieves or burglary, nor does it serve any didactic purpose.10 The thief in the story questions simplistic categories of good and bad; right and wrong; honesty and dishonesty, that dominate popular perception. Charandas as a character cannot be understood within these binaries. He simultaneously exists in both categories and destabilises them. He is a thief, a career criminal, yet he displays such honesty as cannot be shown even by the best. The most important among the five vows was the last one – that he would never lie to anyone, which he fulfils until his last breath. The commitment and integrity of a thief in the narrative is juxtaposed with the duplicity and pretence of society in general. The honest thief surpasses even his spiritual guru in living up to the ideal of honesty. His becoming a fearless follower of truth makes him the embodiment of truthfulness while being a thief. Interwoven with humour and philosophy, just like an allegory, the film satirises the evils prevalent in society and enters into a philosophical debate about right and wrong; good and evil. The story of Charandas critiques hypocrisy prevalent in society. Placing the film in the historical context of 1975, when India was passing through a volatile political phase while dealing with the Emergency, this film becomes a political satire on the political state of India. Indira Gandhi expressed her dictatorial tendencies by imposing the Emergency in 1975. It is crucial to understand the factors that led to the declaration of Emergency in the country. The Emergency era revealed the decadence in the political character of 87

P O L I T I C A L C O M M E N TA R I E S T H RO U G H A DA P TAT I O N S

Indian politicians as they preferred personal power to the national interest and democratic values. The 24th amendment of the constitution under the leadership of Indira Gandhi to nullify the verdict of the Supreme Court in the Gokalnath Case, and the case against Indira Gandhi in the High Court of Allahabad which accused her of abusing governmental systems for election campaigns, are symptomatic of the degradation of the moral fabric of Indian political leaders. Indira Gandhi challenged the verdict of the Allahabad High Court in the Supreme Court, but it was upheld. Consequently, rallies were held by JP and Morarji Desai, a result of which meant that “emergency” was declared in the country, which was perceived by the leaders of the opposition to be a strategy to protect Indira Gandhi’s position of power. Charandas Chor can be read as an allegory of the political and moral crisis playing out in the country at that point in time. The voice of truth resides in the ordinary man, Charandas, while the Princess in the film exercises her authority arbitrarily like a monarch. The arbitrary, dictatorial Princess (a woman in power) symbolises Indira Gandhi of the Emergency era and Charandas, the ordinary man. It becomes a political allegory of conflict between the political power centre and disempowered citizens of India in 1975. The dictatorial whim of the Princess in the film signifies the headstrong attitude of the Indian state; while Charandas is the embodiment of values such truthfulness, honesty, commitment and dedication. From the vantage point of a less-than-ordinary character such as Charandas, the film exposes the character of the ruling class and comments on the disintegration of the moral fabric of Indian politicians, especially Indira Gandhi. Most of the folk-tales penned by Vijaydan Detha deconstruct the stereotypes that govern a society. Tanvir, while adapting the Rajasthani folk-tale, places it in the context of Chhattisgarh. The opening song of the play Satyanam Satyanam Satyanam Saar echoes the Satnami cult in Chhattisgharh. Even the first production of the play at Bhilai was also staged in a festival organised by the followers of the Satnami cult.11 The cult believes in the principle that truth is god and god is truth. Reverence of truth shown by Charandas in the narrative is reminiscent of the Satnami cult in Chhattisgarh. Seen from the point of a thief or a marginalised member of society, the play exposes the hypocrisy of the upper-caste and also those who hold power in the political sphere. The guru is greedy and the Princess is proud. Traders and other members of society are corrupt. Ironically, it is a thief who displays honesty and integrity. Humour in the story makes it enjoyable for children, but the content demands a serious engagement to understand all its philosophical and political nuances and shades. Adaptation of a folk-tale involves its own challenges. In Vijaydan Detha’s folk-tale, there is only a thief, who may not have a name. In theatre and film, the thief is accorded a name, and also a particular face. Any village in a folk-tale becomes a particular village when it is adapted into a film. The 88

P O L I T I C A L C O M M E N TA R I E S T H RO U G H A DA P TAT I O N S

film is not set in Rajasthan, nor does it use Chhattisgarhi songs and dance forms, like Tanvir. The film adaptation opens up in terms of space. The artistic success of the film can be understood from Habib Tanvir acknowledging Benegal’s influence on him while conceiving some scenes. Most important among them is the courtroom scene in which Tanvir plays the part of the judge. In these two texts – the play and the film – the influence of one artist on the other and one medium on the other can be seen. The relationship between the play and the film is that of “mutual intertextuality” in which the boundaries between the source and adaptation are blurred. There is a Rajasthani folk-tale, which both the artists tried to translate and adapt in their respective media. Along with its benefits, telling folk-tales through cinema has its own challenges. The most advantageous benefit is that a story which is previously confined to a small group of people or a community, reaches out to a larger audience. Viewers from different cultural backgrounds come to know of a new cultural tale. Sharon R. Sherman and Mikel J. Koven quote Sherman: Folklore films combine the goal of the documentary to record unstaged events with the goal of the ethnodocumentary to provide information about culture. The folkloric film focuses primarily on traditions, those expressive forms of human behavior which are communicated by interactions and whose formal features mark them as traditional. (2) Film adaptations of a folk-tale establish a connection between traditional storytelling with the modern. Films based on folk-tales thus blend traditional narratives in modern times. The process thus results in the fusion of two cultures of storytelling. The most important challenge is the element of oration in folk-tales. As folk-tales develop through oral tradition, their narrative patterns become fluid, making them both local and universal as they can easily travel and easily be adapted. Vijaydan Detha gave these oral narratives a “definitive” tangible form by writing them down, and as a result, somewhat venerating them. Consequently, every adaptation, in theatre or cinema, improvises the folk-tale and revives the fluidity of folk-tales in general. Furthermore, film adaptations of folk-tales results in a shift from oral tradition to visual culture. Folk-tales for their rootedness in oral tradition give space to every artist to adapt them according to their own requirements and vision. A folk-tale is written down by Vijaydan Detha; a theatrical adaptation by Tanvir is made of it and Benegal adapts it into a children’s film – a play in which different modes of storytelling intersect one another. The third important challenge is the audience or viewership of folklorist or folk-tale films. Folk-tales are specific to a culture and community. Circulation 89

P O L I T I C A L C O M M E N TA R I E S T H RO U G H A DA P TAT I O N S

of folk-tales does not demand literacy on the part of the teller or listener. When a folk-tale is written down, it becomes the prerogative of the literate and educated people. In the case of film adaptation, another angle of commerce and economy is also involved, which cannot be ruled out while understanding the dissemination of folk-tales in visual media. However, the angle of stark commerce cannot be found in Benegal’s cinema, but the issue of viewership is certainly a matter to be discussed. A film produced by the Children’s Film Society,12 India, would have a particular viewership. The dissemination of films either in cinema halls, TV or film festivals can take films only to those sections of society which have access to the medium. It is important to bring folk-tales circulating through oral channels to the urban or semi-urban population of India. The filmic folk-tales have their own audiences, which may be different to the folk-tales’ place of origin. Films being simultaneously a diegetic and a mimetic art,13 narration in the film takes place with the help of shots, camera angles, lighting, editing, sound and the actors’ performance. Benegal, while adapting the folk-tale for children’s cinema, adopted modes of narration specific to children’s cinema. The use of subtitles with a voiceover for every new episode in the narrative makes it comprehensible for the young audience. The scene in paradise, the donkey as a character, and the opening up of the film in terms of space, are some of the elements where this work becomes more cinematic than oral or theatrical. Moreover, Benegal brings in changes at other levels too. Folk-tales deal with universal social, ethical, moral and emotional issues expressed in simple narratives. They are regional, yet they are universal. The truth of human predicaments and human emotions is conveyed in such a simple manner that despite being regional tales, folk-tales find their audiences across all borders. Characters in folk-tales are symbolic of values. Benegal adapts a folktale in a medium which disseminates urban legends among viewers through technology. His awareness of his target audience has been influential in determining the aesthetics of his film, yet the satirical undertones of the film makes it a suitable text for adult viewers to read it as a political allegory.

Kalyug (The Machine Age, 1981) The Mahabharata as an epic occupies an important position in India. The Mahabharata is the story of Maha (great) Bharta (India) encompassing in itself philosophical, ethical and moral questions that stand relevant to India as a nation even today. This is one reason that various writers, artists and filmmakers revisit the epic to reflect on moral and philosophical questions of the nation in the present. In modern times, many writers have revisited the Mahabharata to understand the challenges or to find answers to epic questions before the modern India. Shashi Tharoor’s The Great Indian Novel, Mahashweta Devi’s Tales from Kurukshetra and Chitra Banerjee Divakurni’s 90

P O L I T I C A L C O M M E N TA R I E S T H RO U G H A DA P TAT I O N S

The Palace of Illusions are some of the famous retellings of the Mahabharata in modern times. Dharamvir Bharti’s Andha Yug is a play reflecting on the question of violence and giving priority to selfish interests over national interests in Indian politics after India’s independence. Kalyug (The Machine Age 1981) is a modern-day adaptation of the Mahabharata. Although events in the film do not correspond to the episodes of the Mahabharata, there are broad similarities in event patterns, characters and situations between the two narratives. The film was written by Shyam Benegal, and Girish Karnad; dialogues by Satyadev Dubey; the music was composed by Vanraj Bhatia and Govind Nihalani was the cinematographer. Set in Bombay, the film narrates the story of rivalry between two business families. The acrimony and enmity results in financial loss and the loss of human life in both families. Made in 1981, the film also captures the pulse of the rising business world in India. The setting of Bombay, the business capital of India, makes the cityscape of Bombay allegorical for the whole of India despite the cultural, linguistic and religious differences in various parts of the country. The film shows connections between business tycoons and the underworld in the late 1970s and early 1980s. Ramchand and Bhishmchand are two brothers. Upon Ramchand’s death, Bhishmchand remains single throughout his life and raises the two sons of Ramchand. Khubchand, the elder son, has two sons of his own, Dhanraj (Victor Banerjee) and Sandeep (Akash Khurana). Puranchand, the younger brother of Khubchand, who has died, has three sons, Dharamraj (Raj Babbar), Balraj (Kulbhushan Kharbanda) and Bharatraj (Anant Nag). In addition to these important male characters, Karan Singh (Shashi Kapoor) is another character who plays a pivotal role in the narrative. The business conflict between these two families is archetypal of conflict between the Kauravas and the Pandavas in the Mahabharata. In modern times, these two families are not fighting for land or political control over a territory, rather these families compete for dominance in the business empire in the city. The family members of Dharamraj are intrigued by Dhanraj’s getting another contract after having already won one. During a party, Bhishmchand blurts outs that Dhanraj has been given the latest machines by the government which reduce the cost of production. Consequently, they are able to quote a less in tenders. Dharamraj’s family, knowing the secret, challenges the contract given to Dhanraj in the court, which Dharamraj’s family eventually wins. As a result, Dhanraj is worried because this might result in losing the latest machinery to Dharamraj, which would adversely affect other projects of Dhanraj’s family. Karan is a confidant of Dhanraj and is his loyal friend. He is the brain behind Dhanraj’s success. Soon they make Bhishmraj take retirement. Once Dhanraj and Karan take control of the affairs of the business, they become machiavellian. They hire trade union leader, Bhavani Pandey (Om Puri), to disrupt the smooth functioning in the factory of Dharamraj. Their use of 91

P O L I T I C A L C O M M E N TA R I E S T H RO U G H A DA P TAT I O N S

bullies results in the accidental death of an employee. Bharatraj, who is enjoying his honeymoon, is called back to Bombay to sort the affairs. He is able to enter into an agreement with the trade union leader. He buys the leader’s loyalty to crush the workers who are demanding a bonus. Karan and Dhanraj employ another conspiracy against Dharamraj to disrupt their business. They highjack the trucks of Dharamraj. When he files a petition for an insurance claim, Dhanraj fraudulently sends trucks back to Dharamraj’s factory. Sandeep, who was also moving around the factory, is seen by Balraj. Balraj follows Sandeep and after a long chase, he is finally caught by Balraj. On Balraj’s tough questioning regarding Sandeep’s presence in Dhanraj’s factory, Sandeep, who suffers with heart problems, has a sudden cardiac arrest and dies on the spot. Dhanraj sees it as the murder of his brother and hatches a plan to kill Bharatraj in a road accident. In the meantime, Karan has come to know that he is the eldest son of Dharamraj’s mother. Dharamraj’s father was an impotent man. His wife had three sons from a Swami Premananda and Swami’s father was responsible for Dharmraj’s mother’s pregnancy before her marriage. The child born as a result was named Karan, who was brought up by Swami ji’s father. Karan tries to save Bhartaraj’s life by informing their mother, but he failed to save Balraj’s son. Extremely angry over a young boy’s death in the family, Bharatraj hires hit men to kill Karan in a road accident. After Karan’s death, Dharamraj’s mother tells her sons that Karan was their eldest brother and her firstborn. Shattered by the news and discovery, Bharatraj drowns himself in alcohol. He is comforted by Dharamraj’s wife (Rekha), whose marriage is not a happy one. Dhanraj, who is unable to pay the bank loans and has suffered business losses, shoots himself. In addition to the thematic similarity between the film and the Mahabharata, there are other similarities that can be seen at other levels too. Bhishmachand, the bachelor grandfather of the family, is equivalent to Bhishma in the Mahabharata. Khubchand, the equivalent of Dhritrashtra, is not blind, but is confined to his wheelchair. Dhritrashtra’a blindness has been replaced by another kind of physical disability. Puranchand, Khubchand’s younger brother, is Pandu’s equivalent. He is impotent and dies early. Pandu in the Mahabharata is cursed because of which he cannot consummate his marriage. In the film, he is not able to have children. His wife has three sons from Swami ji unlike in the Mahabharata in which Kunti has three sons from three different gods. But the idea of conceiving from a man other than one’s husband has been retained and adapted according to modern times, where gods are not so visible and play a different role. Karan in the film is equivalent to Karana in the epic. As in the epic, in the film too, he is born to an unwed mother. Karan wanted to marry Dharamraj’s wife as Karana in the Mahabharata also fought for Draupadi’s hand. There is no Draupadi as such in the film, but towards the end, tenderness between Bharatraj, who is Arjuna’s equivalent, and Dharamraj’s wife is suggested. Dharamraj and 92

P O L I T I C A L C O M M E N TA R I E S T H RO U G H A DA P TAT I O N S

Balraj are equivalent of Dharamraj Yudhishthra and Bheem in the Mahabharata respectively. There is a minor character, Kishen in the film. Gods in the film set in modern times have been reduced to ineffectual idols making decorative pieces in the households of rich businessmen. Despite these seemingly linear similarities, characterisation in the film is complex, like that in the epic. Every character in the film stands on the scale of grey. There is nothing righteous about Dharamraj, Bharatraj is not noble like Arjuna, and Krishna is almost absent in the narrative. It is difficult to judge any character in the film in black and white terms. After having made three successful political films set in rural India, Benegal focused his lens on the metropolis of Bombay. Like Bhumika, this is one of Benegal’s early city films. He has concentrated on the growing nexus between the world of wealth and the underworld in Bombay, a known centre of international trade and business in India. The modern-day adaptation of the Mahabharata looks at the motif of rivalry between cousins as the central force in the original narrative. The fight over territory is translated into a battle of dominance in business and capital in the times of industrialisation in India. The film highlights the loss of human life, loss of moral values and destruction of two business families over jealousy and rivalry. The epic destruction of a civilisation after the battle of Mahabharata is shown through the destruction of two business families, once rich and powerful in Bombay. Two families with common roots have become each other’s archrivals. In the ethos of capital, each family wants to assert its supremacy over the other by grasping and commandeering business opportunities from the other. The rivalry leads to nothing but self-destruction. Pamela Lothspeich, a scholar of South Asian studies, who has worked on Ramlila and the Mahabharata, reads the film in the political context of the post-Emergency era. The Emergency was a severe blow to the Nehruvian dream of socialism and the manifestation of individualism over high political ideals. “The film thus cynically exposes the green, materialism and corruption of the corporate elite in Mumbai. It evokes the dark pessimism of Indira Gandhi’s post-Emergency India. And it suggests a breakdown in family cohesion in modern urban India, as cousins ruthlessly compete and even kill to attain their ends” (Lothspeich 2009: 89). Aesthetically, Benegal’s visuals and the narrative pace successfully create the emotion of dread in a world of capital and crime, making the film’s associations with the film noir genre suggested through the use of noir lighting and the criminal world of crime. The beginning of the film sets the tone. Dhanraj and Karan are looking at the machinery and sparks of welding fill up the whole frame. The film assumes epic dimensions as a simple tale of a family unfolds to mirror the nation’s story. Karan, a marginalised character in the rivalry between two royal families in the epic, is afforded a central role in the narrative. Benegal has given Karan’s point of view to the film. Karan is scheming 93

P O L I T I C A L C O M M E N TA R I E S T H RO U G H A DA P TAT I O N S

and cunning enough to destabilise Dharamraj’s business. Karan can only be matched by Bharataraj, Arjun’s equivalent in the film. While other characters have lost their conscience in the battle of rivalry, only Karan retains his scruples. When he comes to know that Dhanraj is planning to kill Bharatraj, his younger brother, he tries to save Bhartaraj and also resigns from Dhanraj’s company. Bharatraj goes too far and succeeds in getting him killed in a manufactured road accident. Karan provides sense of waste generated by the loss of goodness and integrity in the narrative when pitched against all the other characters. He stands tall in his commitment to his friend, Dhanraj, and also in his moral integrity. An illegitimate, abandoned child is crushed between two wheels of time as they move in opposite directions. The film ends with a strong sense of waste and futility in the blind pursuit of capital, rivalry and crime. The most ingenious transposition is the most basic one: the epic’s tale of war over dynastic succession is here translated into the intense competition between rival industrial houses in the 1970s heyday of “license raj,” strict import quotas, tax raids to uncover “black money,” and sometimes, violent labor unrest. Arjuna’s journey to heaven to obtain divine weapons becomes an alluded-to training sojourn in (where else? ) America, and Karna’s equivalent effort yields special imported machinery which, for a time, trounces the competition. The Pandavas and Kauravas are hard-drinking workaholics who neglect their wives. . .14 What makes Kalyug a particularly special film by Benegal is his masterly control over his medium. It is skillfully and creatively crafted. Govind Nihalani used lighting to add layers of meaning to the film. The pace at which the narrative moves and the way it has been maintained throughout the film recalls the craftsmanship of Satyajit Ray. This film is no less than any other work of cinematic excellence in India. The effect of shock, the feeling of dread and the sense of loss that the movie leaves its viewers with speak volumes for Benegal’s craftsmanship. The title of the film Kalyug is rooted in the Hindu concept of four ages – Satya Yuga, Treta Yuga, Dwapar Yuga and Kali Yuga. The Kali Yuga or Kalyug, the last age, stands for the Dark Age and is known for evil, sin and loss of righteousness. The popular understanding in India is that Kal Yuga began with the beginning of the battle of Kurukshetra in the Mahabharata. The title of the film also hints at the depletion of moral fabric in modern Indian society. Both the epic and the film comment on the loss of values in humanity in the mad pursuit of materialist ambitions. Benegal cautions the nation that in the age of capitalism, rivalry in business and greed for money can lead to the downfall of a nation, if ambitions are pursued without morality and ethics. Privatisation began in India in the 1980s. This film, made in 1981, 94

P O L I T I C A L C O M M E N TA R I E S T H RO U G H A DA P TAT I O N S

almost forewarns the nation about the impending nexus between the business world and the criminal world –in the age of privatisation.

Suraj Ka Saatwan Ghoda (The Seventh Horse of the Sun, 1992) Suraj Ka Saatvan Ghoda (1992) is an adaptation of Dharmvir Bharti’s novel with the same title written in 1952. The novel deals with the theme of love and class. Despite it being a narrative around the theme of love, it cannot be called a romantic novel as the narrative highlights the failure of romantic ideals in the age of modernity. Modern middle-class man/ woman, caught in the vicious web of middle-class preoccupations of security, survival, class-consciousness and caste, fails to attain the ideal of love. The novel can be seen as a critique of Devdas syndrome in which the lover fails to rise above the class barriers. But instead of drowning his life in liquor, as in Devdas, the protagonist of the novel understands the limitations imposed by class and caste in Indian society. The middle-class man in the novel rationalises the failure of the romantic ideal, understands the challenges and reasons for failed love, but is not capable of breaking the structures of society. Devdas ends his life in a melodramatic manner, and in Suraj Ka Saatvan Ghoda, Manek Mulla rationalises it; both fail to become romantic lovers. Furthermore, written in 1952, it is a self-reflexive novel which presents a treatise on theoretical issues on the nature of art and understanding human predicaments within a Marxian frame. It blurs the boundaries between fiction writing and literary theory. The novel is written in a non-realistic mode. There are various ruptures in the linear chronology of time. The narrative observes various temporal anachronisms and spatial dislocations. The plot involves stories around three women, Jamuna, Lily and Satti. Each of them belong to different layers of society, and their lives are affected by the social structure. When fragments of various narratives within the main narrative are connected, different women and their love stories meet at Manek. Benegal’s adaptation of Suraj Ka Saatvan Ghoda was produced by the N.F.D.C. The screenplay of the film was written by Shama Zaidi and the music was composed by Vanraj Bhatia. Piyush Shah was the cinematographer of the film. The film opens with Shyam (Raghuvir Yadav), an artist, looking at paintings in an art gallery. While adapting a novel that comments on fundamental questions on the nature and function of literature, the opening scene of the film expands the aesthetic horizons of the film by including painting, literature and cinema in adaptation. The entire film is narrated in Shyam’s flashback. The narrative that begins with Shyam looking at paintings is the first-level narrative. In it, Manek Babu or Manek Mulla (Rajit Kapur) tells various stories, which are various second-level narratives within the first-level narrative. The film ends with the first-level narration. Shyam’s voiceover introduces himself, 95

P O L I T I C A L C O M M E N TA R I E S T H RO U G H A DA P TAT I O N S

Manek Babu and other friends. Manek was the eldest by a few years. He had a big repertoire of stories which he would often share with them. While voiceover tells the viewers about Manek Babu and other friends, the camera moves from the art gallery to a crowded and chaotic street of a small town. From the street it shows the balcony of a room in which Manek Babu and his friends are discussing literature, its function and purpose in society. If Manek opines that the theme of love is central to literature and should be present in it, he is contradicted by one of the listeners in the group who voices his pragmatic and utilitarian point of view. The opening scene establishes the importance of art serving a social function. It should either give readers a critical understanding of social problems or give them a new perspective on it. Manek, while expressing his Marxist understanding of human relationships, says that love is not a personal and subjective feeling; rather its essence is determined by the economic base and the class conflict in a society. In order to prove his point, Manek tells them stories of three women namely Jamuna, Lily and Satti. There are some second-level narratives which overlap with each other. Sometimes, one story is told more than once giving different information in different narrations. The three women belong to Manek in one way or another. Jamuna (Rajeshwari Sachdev) belongs to the lower middle-class family, Lily (Pallavi Joshi) is an educated woman and Satti (Neena Gupta) is a poor woman. Jamuna is Manek’s neighbour. Manek visits Jamuna’s house daily to feed her cow and to give her books. She loves Tanna and wants to marry him. Tanna is too weak a man to stand against his domineering father and belongs to a caste lower than Jamuna’s in the social hierarchy. Jamuna reads Sarat Chandra Chatterjee’s novel, Devdas. She compares Tanna to Devdas. Owing to their class/caste differences, their match cannot take place. Jamuna is married off to a rich old man. It becomes difficult for Jamuna and her husband to have a child. Jamuna performs some rituals, as advised by a priest, during which she comes closer to the tonga driver, Ramdhan (Ravi Jhankal). The relationship between Manek and Lily explores the romantic beauty of the man-woman relationship in which pain, separation and union are romanticised. In one scene, his romanticised vision of love involves appreciating Lily’s beauty, admiring rain droplets on her hair and asking Lily to act like Devsena in the work of Jaishankar Prasad. Invoking the romance of Skandgupta and Devsena, Manek romanticises separation with Lily. This narrative brings in the first romantic song of the film, which revolves around the theme of love, moments spent in the company of the lover and questioning the meaning of time spent together, if lovers have to separate at some point. Lily is married to Tanna. The male-centric romanticised view of life, love and even separation gives Lily a broken heart, which casts its shadow on her future life. She begins her married life with Tanna carrying the bitterness of the failure of the romantic dream. Owing to Tanna’s father’s behaviour and her personal unhappiness, she leaves Tanna’s house forever. 96

P O L I T I C A L C O M M E N TA R I E S T H RO U G H A DA P TAT I O N S

Satti is a poor woman. She was found by a soldier, Chaman Thakur, when he was posted to Afghanistan. Chaman Thakur has raised Satti. She goes to the market to sell soap. She is Manek’s friend and wants to help him with his studies. Mahesar Dalal (Amrish Puri), Tanna’s father, is a womaniser. Initially he tries to buy Satti, offering money to her caretaker. When he fails to buy her, he rapes her one night. One evening, Satti arrives at Manek’s home and tells him that she has left Chaman Thakur’s house forever. Scared, Manek tells his brother everything, who brings Chaman Thakur to his home. Chaman Thakur and Mahesar Dalal arrive and take Satti forcibly away. During the scuffle, Satti drops her knife at Manek’s home. Manek picks up the knife and keeps it with him, which has become the triggering point of this narrative. The next morning, the soap seller of the village tells the villagers about Satti’s suspected murder. Shyam shares his dream in which he sees different images together. All the visuals are from the stories that Manek has told. Manek encourages him to transform his dreams, visuals and visions into stories. While talking over tea, Manek says this facet of love can perhaps be better understood by negating various possible definitions of love. But Manek believes that the human heart, despite such challenges and contradictions, yearns for the ideal of love. Man’s heart is guided by the last, the youngest and the seventh horse of the Sun, which is called the horse of the future. At this point, a beggar woman touches Manek’s shoulder. Manek is shocked to see that it is Satti, who is carrying a young child and her uncle on a beggar’s barrow. Manek follows her in the darkness and is never seen again. When the film ends, Shyam is at the same art gallery. The narrative raises various theoretical issues around fiction, class and its effects on the human self, love, different shades of femininity, what kind of femininity should be represented in literature and the importance of narrative techniques. While discussing Jamuna’s narrative, one of the listeners gives a Marxist interpretation of the story in which Jamuna represents humanity, Manek represents the middle class, Jamuna’s husband represents feudalism and Ramdhan, the working-class. When both the feudal lord and the middle-class man failed to help Jamuna, it is Ramdhan who rescued Jamuna. Jamuna is a romantic lover at heart. It is because of her idealism that Jamuna wants to marry Tanna. She has the courage to stand against her parents. Her romantic idealism is thwarted by her economic circumstances and Tanna’s weakness. Owing to her circumstances, Jamuna comes closer to Ramdhan, the tonga driver. Jamuna, who was once a romantic lover, gradually moves away from the ideals of morality as well as romantic love. Her moral downfall is the result of the rigid class structure of society. Their discussion also includes the debate about whether the protagonist should be an ordinary woman like Jamuna or figures like Shakuntala or Radha; and how love is also affected by socio-economic factors. The narrative also raises the question of who should be the protagonist of a story. Through a question raised by Manek Babu’s friends – Why tell 97

P O L I T I C A L C O M M E N TA R I E S T H RO U G H A DA P TAT I O N S

stories of women like Jamuna? Why not stories of innocent and pure women like Shakuntala and Radha; or modern female protagonists like courageous Sunita created by Jainendera Kumar or Jaishankar Prasad’s Devsena? This debate centres around idealism in contrast with realism in art. The narrative reflects the vulnerability of idealism in middle class. Instead of understanding Jamuna’s character through the lens of prudish morality, the narrative makes an appeal to pay attention to Jamuna’s class and gender, which sits at the heart of her victimhood and downfall. Satti is another character in the narrative who is a victim of class difference in society. Even though her class and gender make her situation vulnerable, she lives her life with dignity and honour. However, she is a victim of one man’s desire and another man’s weakness. Her downfall is caused by her class and also by the lack of courage in Manek. The narrative offers a critique of weak sensibilities. Intellectual rationalisation may give a fine understanding of the problems posed by the structure of society based on class and caste, but characters like Manek Babu have failed to resist the social structures. The escapist lover, instead of rebelling against the social system, succumbs under its pressure. By blaming the class structure, a weak escapist lover like Manek abdicates from his responsibility and uses it as an excuse to defend himself. Jamuna and Satti are not merely the victims of a class-ridden society, but also weak personalities like Manek. The loss of the ideal of the romantic lover, the loss of idealism and the loss of strong sensibilities are the causes behind Jamuna’s and Satti’s downfall. The narrative discourse in fiction and film directs readers’/ viewers’ attention more towards the class structure than man’s responsibility and role in resisting existing structures. Unlike romantic novels, it seems that this narrative gives a pragmatic view of life. Manek, the intra-diegetic narrator, tells different stories, but each story seems to have a similar ending revolving around the focus of class while understanding the predicament and complexity of human relationships in modernity. Three women in the narrative – Jamuna, Lily and Satti – come into Manek’s life at different stages of it. They belong to different classes of society and also exhibit different shades of femininity. Jamuna is a carefree and freespirited lower-middle-class female. She reads books and cherishes romantic notions of love. She loves Tanna and is ready to fight her parents for his sake. At the same time, she understands Tanna’s personality and his weakness, without judging him. She would spend time with Manek whenever she would feel sad or lonely. Being older than Manek, she bullies him. On one occasion, she and Manek, a young boy at the time, seem to be at the point of sexual intimacy. She stops herself just in time. Later, she expresses her desire to Tanna after his marriage but he does not encourage it. Discussions held in the film focus on Jamuna’s class and understand her as a victim of her class. The second female character is Lily. She is an educated, blunt and selfrespecting woman. She loves Manek intensely and cannot imagine living without him. After her romance with Manek fails, she marries Tanna. She 98

P O L I T I C A L C O M M E N TA R I E S T H RO U G H A DA P TAT I O N S

refuses to be bullied by Tanna’s father and shows the courage to leave her husband’s house. She even refuses to give shelter to Mahesar Dalal, when he was running away from the police. This strong woman is a victim of Manek’s weakness as a lover. The third woman is Satti, who belongs to the lower class and is perhaps the strongest of them all. She teaches Manek the lesson of humanity. Despite being poor, she is willing to help Manek with his studies. She comes to Manek seeking his protection. But Manek fails to rise to the occasion. Manek, while telling stories to his friends, cites class conflict to understand a failed relationship. Manek’s discourse has focused on the economic condition to understand the situation of each character, but all three women are victims of the male-centric point of view, not only class. Three suffering women are pitched against three men: Manek, Tanna and Mahesar Dalal, who have each contributed to the tragedies of these women. Manek’s worldview is that of a non-idealist, escapist lover. Besides their economic circumstances, Manek’s own weakness, especially in the case of Lily and Satti, is equally responsible for their personal tragedies; while Jamuna is a victim of Tanna’s weakness. Satti suffers at the hands of men who exploit women and a weak man, who fails to stand for her. Another man, who has been a recurrent villain in all the narratives is Mahesar Dalal, a domineering man and a womaniser. He has played a negative role in every relationship whether it was Tanna’s and Jamuna’s relationship; or Lily’s mother and bullying Lily and casting evil eyes on Satti. By over-emphasising economic conditions, Manek shrugs off man’s responsibility to act when required. Manek has been putting on a mask of the nonromantic, cynic narrator throughout the narrative, focusing more on class than his own weakness. But while telling different stories, which ultimately make Manek’s narrative complete, his real self is exposed. Telling stories helps Manek understand his flaws and weakness better, which is crucial for his transformation. That is the reason when Manek finds Satti at the end of the film, he follows her and disappears. His following Satti suggests that he has gone to correct the mistake he made in his life. The ending of the narrative makes amends to restore faith in love and humanity. At heart, Manek believes in the ideal concept of love. He does say to his friends that love is determined economically, but he also believes that love has the potential to transcend class structures and bring change to society. His emphasis on class in the failure of romantic love is a kind of his self-defence. When he sees Satti, he finds an opportunity to amend his past mistakes, which he takes. Suraj Ka Saatvan Ghoda restores faith in love and the human capability to resist social structure not by giving a romantic narrative, but by exposing human weakness to act. Suraj Ka Saatvan Ghoda critiques the “Devdas phenomenon”. Devdas as a text is constantly present in the whole narrative of the film. By making constant and repetitive reference to Devdas, through Jamuna and Lily, this narrative examines the idea of a weak lover. Jamuna reads Devdas, the novel, and Lily watches the film, Devdas. If Daharmvir Bharti’s novel 99

P O L I T I C A L C O M M E N TA R I E S T H RO U G H A DA P TAT I O N S

critiques the literary Devdas in the 1950s, Benegal’s film critiques the “Devdas phenomenon” in the 1990s. In addition, it also disapproves of complicated narrative strategies employed by writers by adopting a subversive technique of exposing the weakness of too much reliance on narrative techniques. Both fiction and film are self-reflexive narratives. Self-reflexivity of these narratives is determined by these narratives’ reflection on the aesthetical, formal and philosophical dimensions of narrative. Both narratives speak about nature and function of narrative or art in society. Discussion between Manek and his friends bring in various debates of the study of art and literature, including relevance of narrative strategies in storytelling. Manek is of the opinion that complicated narrative strategies are a ploy used by writers who do not have a convincing story to tell. Manek is an admirer of Tagore, Maupassant and Chekhov, who can leave their readers spellbound. Various second-level narratives give the film its fragmented structure. Information given in one second-level narrative is compensated by information given in another second-level narrative. There are many incidents which are told more than once in the narrative. Events which are narrated from a different point of view giving different information about the same event. Thus, establishing the idea that each narrative is told from a particular point of view gives the reader only a partial truth. The whole truth can only be deciphered by connecting the fragments of the different narratives about the same event told from varied points of view. Thus, the “real” or “whole” meaning is an ideal that remains out of the reach of one particular narrative. The film also comments on the relationship between reality and fiction in narrative art. Every fictional narrative, literary or film, has the elements of both – reality and fiction. Every fictional narrative is partly factual and partly fictional. In the process of weaving a narrative, the aestheticisation of reality takes place. The narrative is the site where real-life incidents are moulded into the aesthetics of the respective art form. The film and the novel, in this case, are an attempt to give a theory of narrative art by weaving a narrative around its different tenets. The novel was written soon after India’s independence, when Indian society was debating with various issues pertaining to nation-building, gender roles in the new nation and also the function of art in this historical context. In the 1950s, the novel reflected on redefining the gender roles, the relevance of romantic ideals in modernity. The year of the film coincides with the period when India adopted the economic policy of liberalisation and globalisation in 1991. The new economic model India adopted in 1991 once again was a moment to reflect on the direction the new India, under the influence of a liberal economy, would take. The new socio-economic reality revived the fundamental questions confronting India as a nationstate. Before India could march on the path of a liberal economy and a free market, the film reflects on the fundamental questions of art and its function 100

P O L I T I C A L C O M M E N TA R I E S T H RO U G H A DA P TAT I O N S

in society. Broken temporal chronology, intertextuality provided by other Hindi novels and Devdas, the novel and the film, Suraj Ka Saatvan Ghoda employs postmodernist narrative techniques to reflect on the questions of art and society in the new socio-economic context of liberalisation.

Notes 1 This is based on the categories of signs given by Charles Sanders Peirce. 2 There are various categories under which arrangement of events in time is studied in narratology. For details, one may refer to the works of Gerard Genette, Gerald Prince, Mieke Bal, Shlomith Rimmon-Kenan to understand the tools of narratology. The author has also produced a book studying narratives in adaptation from the perspective of narratology. 3 Christopher Orr builds argument based on the ideas of John Ellis. 4 One film being discussed in this chapter is based on a play but made for children. 5 The author has Junoon in his mind which is based on a novella written by Ruskin Bond in English. 6 Pigeons have a strong presence even in the Quran and are associated with various incidents of Prophet Mohammad’s life. In many parts of the Quran, birds, especially pigeons, become the symbol to describe Allah’s grace and mercy. 7 Satyajit Ray in Shatranj Ke Khiladi, an adaptation of a short story by Munshi Prem Chand suggests the same. 8 The given information is based on the introduction to the play written by Habib Tanvir. 9 Mainstream Hindi cinema has already produced films like Do Aankhen Barah Haath (Shantaram 1957), Jewel Thief (Vijay Anand 1967), Do Chor (Padmanabham 1972). 10 The idea is central in the film, Do Aankhen Barah Haath (V. Shantaram 1957). 11 The Satnami cult was originally founded in Punjab in the seventeenth century. In Chhattisgarh, the Satnami cult was founded by Swami Ghasidas in 1820. 12 The government body was founded by the late Pt. JawaharLal Nehru, the former Prime Minister of India. In the 1970s, the Doordarshan was the most important medium of dissemination, besides biennial Children Film Festivals. 13 The author of this book has written a book about adaptation in which he studies films as a combination of mimetic and diegetic art. For details, refer to the bibliography to read the title under the author’s name. 14 https://uiowa.edu/indiancinema/kalyug.

101

4 ADAPTING HISTORY 1

Where there is no narrative, there is no historyBenedetto Croce

History and its narratives are central to imagining a nation. Be it a qualified historian’s understanding of history or people’s understanding of history in the popular imagination, narratives are fundamental to the formation of national consciousness. “Citizen’s concept of history- more specifically a shared inheritance- (real or imaginary) – is most vital in this process of national construction” (Phillip 1996: 386–387). The relationship between history and cinema was given greater impetus when Hayden White put forth his ideas that the structuration of narratives in history is like that of literary narratives. There had been discussions and debates by different schools of history over the use of narrative(s) in history earlier as well.2 The group of semiologists and narratologists such as Roland Barthes, Foucault, Derrida, Gerard Genette, Todorov, Julia Kristeva etc. , who understood narrative as a code, may or may not be considered fit “for the representation of reality” (White 1990: 31). Those who wished to define history or historical query as scientific, had strong reservations about the use of literary and popular narratives in historical thinking. Differentiating “historical story” from a fictional story, their apprehension is that narrative being a form of discourse may not be an appropriate medium to tell the historical truth as fictionalisation of history may lead to distortion of history. At the same time, Genette’s understanding of narrative discourse as a relation between what is said and how it is said, is important for understanding the relationship between narratives and history. Hayden White opined a true (history) narrative account is not the result of anybody’s figment of imagination, rather it is the result of a historical method. “The form of the discourse, the narrative, adds nothing to the content of the representation; rather is a simulacrum of the structure and processes of real events” (White 1990: 27). According to C.H. Peters, “Kant thought that history makes sense only when viewed as if it had a pattern” (Peters 1993: 102

A DA P T I N G H I S T O RY

117). Making a pattern through the narrative is an attempt to give a meaning to history. Understanding history through popular narratives challenges monolithic and the fixed nature of history as it includes other versions of history existing in the popular imagination. Every narrative, across the media, gives a structure to events and an order of meaning. Narrative is, thus, the “instrument with which the conflicting claim of the imaginary and the real are mediated, arbitrated, or resolved in a discourse” (White 1990: 4). Using Linda Hutcheon’s ideas of adaptation as interpretation, historical biopics3 are another interpretation of history.4 No narrative of history is exhaustive; rather with every narrative a new interpretation of history emerges. Every historical film, therefore, contributes to history by adding new meaning to it. History is not fixed and static, it is in flux; it is always “becoming”. If history is also structured like narrative, as White has postulated, Andrew Dudley’s question “why not treat historical films as adaptation” (Dudley 2004: 191) becomes important to the study of historical films. Historical films, exploring translatability of narratives, are a revision of history across media. The premise is that narratives – fictional, historical or cinematic – offer a new meaning by the structuration of events in time and space. In the case of historical films, which are based on historical narratives, films are not seen as derivatives of history. Historical films establish a relationship between the present and the past. In historical films, while “screening the past does not give us a past to which the cinema present is added. It gives us a past-image in the very process of film” (Barta 1998: 10). Cinema not only creates images in the present “to reproduce the contemporary world, but also to animate the past, to reconstruct the great events of history through the performance of the actor and the evocation of atmosphere and milieu” (Tredell as cited by Rosenstone 2006: 11). Shyam Benegal in his long career has not just made films dealing with the history of India, but he has also made films about marginalised communities, marginalised historical figures or the lesser known aspects of famous historical personalities. This chapter studies three historical films made by Benegal which examine the history of Goa’s liberation; a lesser-known narrative of Mahatma Gandhi and, Netaji Subhas Chandra Bose, a marginalised hero from Indian history.5 The attempt is not to establish that the history narrated in these narratives is the authentic history, but to build an argument in the direction that each historical film contributes to the wider narrative of history. Historical films reflect the filmmaker’s interpretation of history, mediated through his medium.

Trikal (Past, Present and Future, 1985) The film tells the story of a rich family of Soza-Soares in Portuguese-occupied Goa in independent India. On the verge of the liberation of Goa, the Indian army is ready to enter Goa as the narrative weaves in the themes of memory, 103

A DA P T I N G H I S T O RY

home(land), the identity of Goans after Goa’s liberation, the micro-history of a family intertwined with the history of Goa and the question of Goa itself in post-colonial India. The story and screenplay of the film were written by Shyam Benegal; dialogues were written by Shama Zaidi and music was composed by Vanraj Bhatia. The film narrative encompasses the culture, society and history of Goa at a monumental moment of its history. “Trikal” means three phases of time: present, past and future. Time in the film becomes the metaphor which also adds a philosophical dimension to the film. Like his earlier films, Benegal gives centre-stage to women in this film as well. Through women, the film tells the story of three generations of a family. Benegal examines the notions of pain, loneliness and unhappiness of women in a respectable Goan family. Along with the question of Goa in post-colonial India is also posed the question of female identity in the Christian patriarchal society. The film runs in a flashback or analepsis when Ruiz Pariera (Naseeruddin Shah) returns to the Soares house in the 1980s. During his journey back to the village, he reflects on changes that have taken place in the landscape of Goa. The sight of the Soares mansion in a dilapidated condition fills him with nostalgia. In his memory runs the narrative of the entire family at the crucial moment of Goa’s liberation. Ruiz Pereira (Naseeruddin Shah), the narrator, returns to his village after a long gap of twenty-four years. The opening shot of the film shows a field divided into three parts with the sound of crowing crows on the diegetic soundtrack. As the titles run, the opening montage juxtaposes two scenes, one showing movement along the road and the second showing a man carrying a coffin on his head, establishing the idea of death and movement in time and space. The montage shows the landscape, Goan architecture with a Portuguese influence, the churches of Goa, huts of the poor people. The montage also establishes the class difference between rich Christians and poor locals. The poor local people, who are barely clad, are shown doing manual tasks, such as carrying the coffin, grave-digging and other menial jobs for the rich. The narrator, the old Ruiz Pereira, while sitting in a car reflects on his journey back home. The voiceover provides information about the narrator and Goa’s history, money coming from the Gulf, which has resulted in the development of new small houses in the fields. As Ruiz enters the house, in the background of the frame is shown a man carrying a coffin. Ruiz’s voiceover reveals that the coffin for the dead has arrived. Coffin, music and Ruiz’s voiceover make the cinematic image move back in time. Ruiz introduces us to all the characters with their traits and idiosyncrasies. Dona Maria Souza Soares (Leela Naidu) has lost her husband, Ernesto, which places the responsibility of the family on her shoulders. She has a daughter, Sylvia (Anita Kanwar) who is married to Senor Lucio (K.K. Raina). They have two daughters, Aurora (Soni Razdan) and Ana (Shushma Prakash). Dona Maria is listening to Portuguese Fado, a Portuguese genre 104

A DA P T I N G H I S T O RY

of music with the theme of longing, melancholia and the sentiments of the poor sung by Amália Rodrigues or popularly known as Amália, the iconic Portuguese fadista who made Fado internationally popular. The camera and voiceover describe the details of the interior of the house – the Burmese wood used to make the stairs, the chapel in the house, Dona Maria’s big pink bedroom. The camera takes us into the room where Ernesto is lying dead and people from the neighbourhood have come to pay their respects. After introducing Sylvia, Lucio, Aurora and Ana, the narrator introduces the young Ruiz, standing in the corner of the room. Ruiz, the narrator, shares his strong love for Ana and also divulges his strong infatuation for another woman, Mila-grenia. After the death of Ernesto, Sylvia is more concerned about Ana’s engagement to Erasmus (Lucky Ali). He and his parents are old Goans, but have settled down in Lisbon. Ana does not love Erasmo. After the funeral of Ernest is shown in great detail, the issues of Goa’s liberation and politics are discussed at the dinner table. The conflicting sentiments of independent Goa and Goa becoming a part of the Republic of India are discussed by the men. The parents of Erasmo are worried about the delayed engagement of Ana and their son as the changing political circumstances could make their return to Lisbon difficult for them. Dona Maria is not ready to accept the fact that her husband has died and she continues to consult him before finalising the date of Ana’s engagement. Her séance sessions bring back the spirits of Rane (Kulbhushan Kharbanda), who was wrongly killed by Dona Maria’s ancestors. Rane was a local rebel and the family were honoured by the Portuguese government for killing him. In addition, the film also discusses the pain of the women in the house through Sylvia’s frustration, Aurora’s unhappiness and Ana’s marriage, fixed against her wishes. After Ernesto’s funeral, the whole family descends on Maria’s room to exchange commiserations with her as the matriarch of the family. Aurora and Ana are both unhappy. Aurora has never seen happiness in her life and Ana is unhappy because her marriage is being arranged with a man she does not love. Erasmo on various occasions unsuccessfully tries to thaw the ice between them. Ruiz serenades Ana, but she does not respond to either of these two men. In the meantime, Maria’s nephew, Leon (Dilip Tahil), appears, who adores Ana. He is a freedom fighter and has escaped from prison. Dona Maria hides him in the cellar of the house. Soon love between Ana and Leon develops and Ruiz’s flirtations with Mila-grenia increase. Almost simultaneously, Leon and Ana; Ruiz and Mila-grenia make love. After Dona Maria’s agreement to arrange Ana’s engagement, an elaborate engagement ceremony is shown first in the church and later, over music and wine at the house. During the celebrations, it is discovered that Ana is pregnant. This discovery leads to ending the engagement. Dr. Pererira, Ruiz’s uncle, proposes marriage between Ana and Ruiz twice in the film as Ruiz loves Ana deeply. Maria declines the proposal saying that their families belong to different 105

A DA P T I N G H I S T O RY

castes. Practising caste among Goan Christians refers to the history of the conversion of high-caste people, especially Brahmins in Portuguese-Goa. An important signifier of the Hindu past of Goa is shown when Maria decides to go ahead with Ana’s engagement, she asks Sylvia to send a coconut to the Mangeshi temple. Mangesh is the most famous temple of the Goa region. The Sarswats of Goa moved the Linga of Mangesh to the banks of the river Zuari, which was then ruled by a Hindu king, when conversion to Christianity was then introduced by the Portuguese. After Ana’s engagement with Erasmo is broken off, Ana flees with Leon. Maria had earlier asked Leon to leave the house as police came searching for him. After the couple flee and Aurora’s decides to become a nun, shattered Sylvia and her husband decide to leave the village. Ruiz lies to the father of the church that he had had sex with Mila-grenia while he was questioned about Ana’s pregnancy with this hope that if he is perceived as the father of Ana’s child this would facilitate his marriage with Ana. Ruiz is sent to Bombay by his uncle to study. In the house only Maria is left with Mila-grenia along with other servants. One night, Mila-grenia expresses her unwillingness to help Maria with the séance. When Maria reconciles herself to Ernesto’s death and resolves to practise the séance no more, she has a vision of Chinese goddesses telling her that Ernesto has finally mingled with four elements which would protect her. Mila-grenia delivers Ruiz’s baby and the flashback ends at that point. While the elder Ruiz is leaving the mansion, he wonders why he returned to the village and the Soares’s house. By showing details of the local culture of Goan Christians such as music, an elaborate funeral, a detailed engagement ceremony, use of Amália’s Fado, songs sung by Alisha Chenoi and Remo Fernandes, a Goan music star, séance sessions by Maria and the vision of the Chinese opera dancer goddess along with the use of the flashback technique, Benegal ruptures the linearity associated with realism. Using cinematic magic realism, in the narrative he has woven the individual memory of Ruiz Pereira with the collective memory of Goan identity, culture and history. The film was made “when he was growing increasingly restless with linear storytelling and absorbed with the possibilities of fragmented narration and magical realism” (Datta 2008: 148). The film treats time at a philosophical level. The narrator’s identity in the present depends on his past. Ruiz is unsure if people in his village would recognise him after such a long gap. The only thing which can help the local people recognise him is his ancestor’s name. He needs his past for his identity in the present. Women of three generations of the Souza Soares family represent three phases of time. Dona Maria is stuck in her past. She is not ready to be reconciled to her husband’s death and calls his spirit with the help of Mila-grenia. Dona Maria holds a séance session daily. But, instead of communicating with the spirit of her dead husband, it is the spirits of Khustoba Rane and Vijay Rane which appear. The stories of Khustoba Rane and Vijay Rane reveal the guilt of the Soares family for having supported 106

A DA P T I N G H I S T O RY

the colonisers. In her individual memory, the history of the family and the wrongs of her grandfather co-exist. The guilt of the family still haunts her, from which she seeks redemption in order to move on with life. Her daughter, who is generally seen shrieking in the film, is frustrated with her situation. She is married to a man who lives with her at her parents’ house and she is worried about the future for her two daughters. Aurora and Ana take different courses for themselves as Aurora decides to become a nun and Ana elopes with Leon and settles down in Lisbon. In contrast, Dona Maria believes that the human self is defined by the past even though people try to run away from it in search of new opportunities to give new meaning to their existence. She wants to hold on to past values, memories and customs. According to Dona Maria, in the ever-changing course of life, the only certainty is the past. Dona Maria is so deeply welded to her past that she is not able to move on. Her refusal to accept her husband’s death and attending séance session is symbolic of her believing in old practices. But she is finally able to shed her conventional beliefs. The final vision of the Chinese dancer / goddess represents her transition. The history of an individual, a family and also a nation lies in the past. When placed in the historical context of Goa’s liberation, Dona Maria’s situation is symbolic of her holding onto the memory of the Goan lifestyle, culture and identity in the wake of the changing political status of Goa. Ruiz, who had moved out of the village and had a successful career, and travelled the world, has a strong longing for his roots. Recalling John Keats’s famous ode ‘On Grecian Urn’, he compares his village with a vase of the Ming period, on which is carved the history and culture of the ruling Ming dynasty. If separated from its history and culture, the vase could not be more than a delicate and beautiful object. Its value would be confined to its outer appearance. The comparison is made with the fractured identity of the village and those associated with it. The narrator’s vase, the metaphor of his memory and history, is the house of Souza Soares. In this space, his personal memory collides with the history of Souza Soare’s family and the history of Goa. The filmmaker has looked at the history of Goa and the question of Goan identity from the point of view of Goan Christians especially at the time when right-wing organisations such as the R.S.S. was playing an active part in the liberation of Goa in post-colonial India. The film does not narrate the history of the liberation of Goa, rather it is a narrative of the anxiety among Goans about their changing political identity and the question of India as a state when India invaded Goa in 1961. Ruiz’s visit to his homeland in the 1980s, an Indian Goa and his reflections on the changing landscape of Goa represent the questions that plagued “Goans” after Goa became a part of India. Unlike popular Hindi cinema in which Goa is associated with tourist destinations, beaches and drinking, the film portrays a different image of Goa. In this film, Goa stands poised at the threshold of transition in which the 107

A DA P T I N G H I S T O RY

old order is being replaced by the new. The death of Ernesto signifies the death of old feudal Christian Goa, which was a Portuguese colony. Maria’s strong fixation with talking to Ernesto even after his death signifies her desire to cling on to the past, which she later outgrows. The changing social order is represented by the change in Ana, Sylvia, her husband and Ruiz. In this moment of change, the film narrative becomes the space where the past meets the present to look to the future. II The films discussed in this section – The Making of the Mahatma and Netaji Subhas Chandra Bose-the Forgotten Hero – are known as historical biopics.6 Based on the life story of a historical personality, in a historical biopic two intertwined narratives are simultaneously adapted. One is the narrative of history and the other, the narrative of the historical personality. Using Hayden White’s ideas, historical films are now being seen as representation and recreation of history which is a way to create a new historical meaning through images. In the Kantian perspective too, history is viewed as a ”life-narrative of mankind” (Peters 1993: 117) which is moving towards the fulfilment of man’s rational and social potential. History is a narrative of man’s constant interactions with his present and past. In this perspective, man and history cannot be separated from each other. Man, while realising the potentials of his social, moral and political being, contributes to history as it is made. He contributes to the historical moment as it happens by responding to it and in the process, his own self is also shaped. History is made through him and through history, he becomes a man. Thus, in historical biopics is found the relationship between the man and the (historical) moment, interacting with the narrative. Historical biopics are a contribution to the narrative of history made by the artist. Historical biopics present a historical personality and its negotiations with the historical moment, as seen through a different lens in a different historical moment by the filmmaker. Through simultaneous negotiations between the man and history, historical biopics tell the story of a man while telling the history and tell history while telling the story of the man.7 In Linda Hutcheon’s phraseology, historical biopics are derived from history, but they are not derivatives of history. If adaptation is an interpretation, every historical biopic interprets history and contributes to everevolving history from a different vantage point. Working within its own time-space constraints, events around the historical figure are structured offering a new interpretation of and meaning in history. The filmmaker’s intent is not to record and narrate the facts, rather the filmmaker shares their understanding of history through their medium. In this scheme of thoughts, it would be erroneous to look for complete loyalty to historical facts in historical films. Rosenstone’s rejection of the idea of factual accuracy in film adaptation is akin to film theorists and critics discarding their 108

A DA P T I N G H I S T O RY

anxiety over the need to remain faithful to historical facts while dealing with the film adaptation of literature. Instead of finding loyalty to history in historical biopics, Rosenstone says what is more important is what “kind of historical thinking that takes place on the screen” (Rosenstone 2006: 15). Narration in fiction or film is likely to result in deviations from facts which may not necessarily result in the loss of historical meaning; rather, it offers a fresh interpretation of history. From the point of view of a purist, films may sometimes romanticise a historical figure, which can be seen as taking liberties with history or in some cases, as misrepresentation of (historical) characters; but history in films cannot be merely accurate in its conventional purist terms, but “suggestive, symbolic and metaphoric” (Rosenstone 2006: 31). It is more important to engage with the “metaphorical dimension in historiography” (Rosenstone 2006: 36). As “History itself is an adaptation of some earlier history” (Leitch 2015: 10), every act of writing history or making historical films means that history is being rewritten or reinterpreted. Cinema also writes history through images. Historical biopics do not give a fixed “image” of reality, but another “image”, which acts upon an earlier “image”. Negotiating with other narratives of history, the film adaptation, thus, becomes the site of constant intersections, interpretations and revisions.

The Making of the Mahatma (1996) Mahatma Gandhi has always enjoyed an important position in the nationalist imagination of Indians. Mahatma Gandhi is revered because of certain values he began to symbolise in his own lifetime. The time spent by Mahatma Gandhi in South Africa is crucial to understanding the transformation of Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi into Mahatma Gandhi, who later played an important role in India’s struggle for freedom. Shyam Benegal’s film traces Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi’s journey of becoming Mahatma Gandhi in The Making of the Mahatma (1996). The film is based on a book titled An Apprenticeship of the Mahatma by Fatima Meer, a South African political activist, member of the African National Congress and biographer of both Gandhi and Mandela. The screenplay of the film was written by Fatima Meer, Shyam Benegal and Shama Zaidi. Benegal met Fatima Meer immediately after Nelson Mandela was released from prison. As Benegal told William van der Heide in an interview, Fatima Meer asked Benegal if he would be interested in making a film about Mandela or Mahatma Gandhi. Benegal shied away from making a film on Mandela and decided to make a film on Mahatma Gandhi. Working on Gandhi’s life in Africa afforded Benegal the opportunity to understand Mahatma Gandhi more as “Benegal did not know much about Gandhi’s early history in South Africa before he came upon Meer’s biography, which was banned during the apartheid era in South Africa” (Datta 2008: 150). 109

A DA P T I N G H I S T O RY

The period of twenty-one years (1893–1914) spent in South Africa was important in formulating Gandhi’s ideas. “If it wasn’t for his South African experience, neither his philosophy nor his political strategy nor his tactics nor his methods nor his own principles of living would have seriously found any kind of crystallization” (Benegal to William van der Heide 154–55). In the early part of his life, after he had attained his barrister’s qualifications from Britain, he played the English gentleman.8 It was during his stay in Africa that he was directly confronted with the horrible face of racism. He discovered how humiliating and petrifying racial discrimination could be. He witnessed social injustice and inhuman treatment being meted out to Indians and Africans. His experiences in Africa introduced him to the heart of darkness of British colonialism. As shown in the film, he was thrown out of the railway compartment at Pietermaritzburg; he was made to sit next to the carriage driver; on another occasion he was beaten by policemen for walking on the pavement; he was constantly addressed as a “coolie”. Benegal has structured the narrative to highlight all such incidents. There were many unjust laws being legislated during the late nineteenth century and early twentieth century. The Free State passed legislation in 1876 which denied Indians the right of residence; the Transvaal Law 3 of 1885 denied Indians the right to own property (which was amended later in 1886) and also stipulated that Asians would have to register paying the sum of £3. In 1891, the Statute Law of the Free State forced Indian businessmen to close their business by September 11, 1891 and wanted Indians to be deported without compensation. In 1898, Indians were banned from mining and in another new law of 1899, they were forbidden to walk on the pavement. The 1906 Immigration Act made the future immigration of Indians subject to literacy requirements.9 In the film, Gandhi goes to South Africa in 1893 to settle a legal issue between two Indian Muslim brothers, the Abdullah cousins, and finds himself in the midst of problems faced by Indians in South Africa. The film shows that when he is about to return to India, a new bill is introduced by the British which means that Indians were about to lose their right to vote. He is persuaded by Indians in South Africa to stay there to help them in their fight against the new bill. Gandhi decides to stay. The longer he stays in Africa, the more he comes to know the problems of people in Africa. His experiences in Africa give him “a febrile sense of fear and anxiety, and a deep sense of humiliation, but also the resolve to combat them” (Needham 2016: 129). Gandhi in Africa mobilised Indians against the discriminatory laws. He was introduced to the philosophies of Ruskin and Tolstoy and he also found his idea of the village republic by establishing self-sustaining farms namely, Phoenix Farm and Tolstoy Farm. The film narrates the chain of events through which Gandhi became a political activist and discovered his method of protest, Satyagraha or passive resistance, the method of civil disobedience and non-violence. The potent political weapons of Satyagraha and 110

A DA P T I N G H I S T O RY

moral righteousness he discovered in South Africa were later effectively used against the British in India as well. Gandhi’s experiences in Africa are crucial to his evolution into Mahatma Gandhi, as he is known to the world today. Historians and scholars, while working on Mahatma Gandhi, have explored different dimensions of Gandhi’s personalities. Gandhi has been seen in the nationalist frame as the father of the nation; while others have looked critically at Gandhi as a historical personality. Desai and Vahee opine that Gandhi in Africa relies upon his status as a British subject to fight for his fundamental, human and the civil rights. On two important occasions he went out of his way, and to the disagreement of his comrades in the struggle, to support the British Empire, i.e. the Boer Wars and the Zulu Uprising. During the Boer Wars, he offered his services to prove his loyalty to the Crown by acting as a stretcher carrier and once again during the Zulu Uprising, he extended his support to the British Empire to help the British understand what an important force, in the form of Indians, was being wasted by the Empire. It is while serving as a stretcher bearer that he was presented with the miserable condition of Africans. “Gandhi hoped that Indians would find redress under British rule after the South Africa War as the treatment of Asians was one of the issues that the British cited as part of their justification for war” (Desai and Vahee 91). In the personal sphere, Gandhi is seen critically through the eyes of his wife, Kasturba, and their son, Hari Lal. Kasturba’s voiceover can be heard at critical junctures in the narrative. While practising Satyagraha in the political sphere, he practised similar methods in his domestic sphere too, which put Gandhi in conflict with his wife and son. Kasturba, as shown in the film and also in Fatima Meer’s book, is a strong woman with clear ideas and has strong disagreements with her husband on various issues such as cleaning the chamber pot, untouchability and keeping the jewellery given to them as a gift while acknowledging Gandhi’s services.10 Kasturba Gandhi is a traditional wife, yet she resists Mahatma Gandhi’s bulldozing the family into his ways of thinking. Despite her adherence to the Hindu tradition, she shows her spiritedness by standing up to Gandhi. That marks her out as a woman with a mind of her own. Kasturba, in the film, raises a fundamental question to Mahatma Gandhi about her status in the family. She disagrees with Mahatma Gandhi’s views that Kasturba Gandhi’s domestic work is not as important as his community service is. Kasturba objects. Her work at home gives Gandhi familial comfort enabling him to practise his politics outside of it. She supports Gandhi and “eventually became his most devoted disciple, but did create space for herself. She didn’t allow him to walk over her” (Benegal to van der Heide 2006: 157). Shyam Benegal tells William van der Heide that Kasturba resisted Mahatma Gandhi despite her being an illiterate woman. She was unlettered and her refusing to learn from Gandhi was also part of her resistance. In the public sphere, Gandhi was fighting for civil rights, human dignity, but in his personal sphere Gandhi was authoritarian, rigid and inflexible. 111

A DA P T I N G H I S T O RY

In the film, Kasturba and his son feel that he unjustly imposes his ideals on them in a hard way. He is equally whimsical when he asks his wife to co-operate with him in his abstinence from sex. The film captures Kasturba Gandhi’s pain. In one scene, when Kasturba promises Mahatma Gandhi to support him in his vow of abstinence from sexual pleasures, Kasturba turns her back to Gandhi after giving him the assurance. The close-up shot shows the pain on Kasturba’s face, which Gandhi is shown not to notice.11 Gandhi attains the position of authority over his wife because of patriarchy and the use of abstinence and penance as weapons. Gandhi draws moral strength from the Gita and verses from other Hindu scriptures. He convinces his wife about the importance of abstinence from sexual pleasure in Satyagraha. Gandhi has his own flaws and shortcomings, which come to the surface during his conflict with his son in the narrative. When seen from the eyes of his wife and the eldest son, Gandhi is inflexible, authoritative and undemocratic in his personal sphere. In the movement from public to private, Gandhi forces on his family his ideas that he was practising in the public sphere. He imposes his whims and ideas on his wife and sons, which his eldest son is not happy about. The film captures the tension between the public sphere and the private sphere of Gandhi. The filmmaker does not overlook Gandhi’s weaknesses and exposes contradictions in his complex personality while portraying him. Kasturba’s voiceover is an important part of the time-image12 of the film.13 The narrating agency in the film also signifies that events had already happened in the past although they are being narrated in the present (of the film narration). Her voiceover establishes a link between the present (the moment of narration) and the past (the historical moment). Kasturba Gandhi, as a seer, witnesses history in the making as well as Mahatma Gandhi changing. She sees Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi “directly encountering contemporary social and political mutations, and who” (Martin-Jones 2011: 74), during his stay in Africa, is “mutating along with these historically shifting contexts” (Martin-Jones 2011: 74), which are crucial to his growth as Mahatma.14 Through Kasturba Gandhi’s re-telling of the past, a different aspect of Mahatma Gandhi’s personality comes alive. Giving Kasturba Gandhi’s voice to the film is a creative ploy by Benegal while examining the female point of view and voice in Fatima Meer’s book. The common thread that runs through Gandhi’s personal and public sphere is the use of Satyagraha. What made Gandhi a Mahatma was his sense of righteousness and morality, which he used as a weapon in his political struggle and also in his family. Based on the principles of non-violence and passive resistance, Gandhi found the weapon of Satyagraha to motivate people to fight for their rights. The philosophy of Satyagraha is based on the ideas of morality, virtue and ethics. The Vaishanava ethos Gandhi belonged to gave him his notions of righteousness and morality. The moral and spiritual strength he drew from the ideas of renunciation and abstinence 112

A DA P T I N G H I S T O RY

became the foundation of Satyagraha. His experiments with truth, which he performed in the public and private sphere, are punctuated with notions of sin and virtue. His values of non-violence, passive resistance, willingness to suffer and the image of the ascetic he attained through renunciations and hardships helped him in winning the support of the common Indian and also empowered him to counter the British oppressive policies. Gandhi was ready to suffer and also asked his followers to suffer, but to not inflict violence in return, which enabled Gandhi to succeed in winning moral authority over the British and exposing the inherent violence in British imperialism. The image of sanyasi exalted his position among his colleagues and even political opponents. Towards the end of the film, Gandhi sits in front of his followers wearing white clothes with his head shaven. He has removed the western clothes he has been wearing and, finally graduating to the status of Mahatma, dons the white clothes of a Hindu sanyasi with the song Vaishanav Jan To Tene Kahiye (You shall be called a Vaishnav, If you know the pain of others)15 as the sound track. Even while telling the story of Gandhi’s struggle and achievements in Africa, the image of Gandhi in the film is not that of a romanticised national hero from an Indian nationalist’s point of view. It is quite a humanistic, complex and paradoxical image of Gandhi that emerges in this film. The image of Gandhi in The Making of Mahatma is different from that which emerges in Gandhi by Richard Attenborough. Gandhi in Attenborough’s film shows the application of ideas in India that Gandhi discovered in Africa. In Attenborough’s film, Gandhi’s stay in Africa works more like a prelude to Gandhi, the film. Attenborough’s film more or less narrates the success story of Mahatma Gandhi in India. Mahatma Gandhi in India is clad in Khadi, carries a simple walking stick and mobilises Indians to fight against the British using the principles of non-violence. Benegal’s film, in contrast, narrates the events of Gandhi’s discovery of his mode of protest, the principle of non-violence, the importance of righteousness and use of the media to spread his ideas. The narrative shows the inner journey of a man from a struggling young lawyer to a powerful leader of the masses. From a legal help to Muslim merchant brothers, he embraced all the oppressed people in Africa and stood for them. Gandhi’s experiences in Africa are crucial for his transformation, spiritual evolution, self-discovery and the role he assigned to himself in the political sphere. He began his journey in Africa to settle a personal dispute of two Muslim traders. Gradually, widening his horizons he also included people from the lower strata of society in the form of the indentured labourers and miners. His is the story of an ordinary man overcoming his weaknesses with his moral conviction, integrity, searing honesty and values of abstinence and asceticism. His journey is from Gandhi, the man to Gandhi, the Mahatma. The film portrays different facets of Gandhi’s personality in public and private spheres through realist aesthetics. The film shows Gandhi grow as 113

A DA P T I N G H I S T O RY

a political leader and at the same time, Gandhi is shown with his human weaknesses and shortcomings. Gandhi protested against the racial discrimination and injustice against Indians in South Africa. He fought against the unjust policies of the British Empire, but was uncritical of the policies he was adopting in his personal sphere. Gandhi is humiliated by the British and is subject to racial discrimination; the same Gandhi also supports the British during two important historical events; he imposes his will on his wife and son, becomes physically violent with her and even tries to throw his pregnant wife out of the house. Some aspects of Gandhi’s personality, as shown in the film, contradict the idealised image of Gandhi in the popular nationalistic imagination. What Jameson famously said “always historicize”, helps in understanding the dynamic interaction of the present with the past. The film, jointly produced by India and Africa, was made soon after apartheid ended in Africa in 1994 and Nelson Mandela had been released from prison. Racial discrimination sits at the heart of apartheid, which formally ended in 1994. The period is known for racial segregation and unjust treatment of black people. During the period of apartheid, the rights of the majority blacks and native ethnic groups were curtailed while protecting the rights of the minority whites. The film highlights the struggle of Mahatma Gandhi against policies of racial discrimination in a different time period. The period in which Gandhi stayed in South Africa can be seen as a preamble to apartheid in South Africa. The British Empire followed almost similar policies of segregation and exclusion, which Gandhi stood against in Africa with the help of Indians and local people. Ashwin Desai and GoolamVahed quote Nuttal and Mbembe and I quote Desai and Vahed that “by 1990 Johannesburg already exhibited almost all aspects that until the 1990s were to characterize the apartheid city”. It was a city where Africans “had to carry passes, were prohibited from walking on the pavements, excluded from public spaces . . . and were largely confined to the single-sex ‘barracks’ of the mines, the ‘Kaffir Location’” (Nuttal and Mbembe in Desai and Vahed 2015: 77). The city of Johannesburg was growing following the policies of “segregation and elimination . . . in the world of race and systematized degradation” (Nuttal and Mbembe in Desai and Vahed 2015: 77). Owing to his struggle for equality and justice, Gandhi became an icon of the struggle against social and political injustice in the British Empire. His experiences in Africa helped him evolve into not merely a leader of Indians but of all humanity. While fighting for the rights of Indians in South Africa, he also understood the pain of Africans. In his struggle for human dignity and while working with Indians in Africa, he saw the unequal treatment being meted out to local Africans too. The role played by Gandhi in Africa reminds one of Nelson Mandela. Though both belonged to two different time periods, because of their struggle for civil rights and equality, they can be linked. Both Mandela and Gandhi shared their belief in equality and justice. Gandhian thought became the fulcrum 114

A DA P T I N G H I S T O RY

of  Mandela’s struggle in Apartheid Africa too. “For the first fifty years of its existence, the African National Congress followed Gandhian principles of civil disobedience and non-violence, what they call passive resistance. “It has been acknowledged by everybody, including Mandela, that Gandhi played a seminally important role for the South African Liberation Movement” (Benegal to van der Heide 155). In 1952, Nelson Mandela received a nine-month jail sentence for organising civil disobedience against discriminatory racial policies in South Africa. The sentence was, however, later suspended. It was in  Africa  that  Gandhi, after having studied Law in Britain, practised it. It was in Africa that Gandhi used civil disobedience as a weapon to fight for equality. The joint creative endeavour of India and Africa revisits the history of India and Africa, two parts of the world which also share a history of British colonialism. Both parts of the world have negotiated with and struggled against British colonialism in different ways. The film is reminiscent of the common historical thread between India and Africa in post-colonial, postapartheid times. It makes an important contribution to post-colonial thought. Adaptation of history establishes a relationship between the historical moment of the present in which the film is made with the historical moment in which the film is set.16 In other words, it is an engagement between Narrative Time Frame and Historical Time Frame, as discussed in the first chapter. Made immediately after apartheid and Nelson Mandela’s freedom from jail in the 1990s, the film takes us back to the man who gave Nelson Mandela his mode of struggle and protest. Through Gandhi’s struggle in Africa, the film establishes Gandhi’s importance not only in the context of the British Empire, but also in the period that came after Gandhi’s assassination in 1948. The film takes a leap back in time from an important historic moment, namely the end of apartheid in Africa to the history of Africa when the policies of racial discrimination were being implemented. Benegal uses songs as well to establish connections between India and Africa. Along with Vande Matram, Nkosi Sikeleli Africa, the South African national anthem is also used towards the end of the film. Benegal tells van der Heide about Vande Matram in an interview that “the South African Indian Congress took over this song for Gandhi’s long march. It was called the Big March and was the first political long march in history” (Benegal to van der Heide 2006: 159). The Indian context of the 1990s is also important to understand the relevance of Gandhian thought and a film based on his life. The right-wing nationalist ideology had begun to gain currency in India, which was propagating the idea of India as a Hindu nation. Escalated hostilities, “otherization” of Muslims and aggressive Hindutava masculinity, manifested in the form of riots in Bombay in December 1992 and January, 1993 after the demolition of the Babri Masjid. In the wake of rising identitarian conflicts, communal politics and the “otherization” of Muslims in India, Gandhian ideas of non-violence, tolerance and communal harmony stood relevant for the country once again. The identity politics were rupturing the idea of India 115

A DA P T I N G H I S T O RY

based on principles of secularism and democracy. The changing narrative of Indian politics in the 1990s was posing a few questions before India as a nation-state, The Making of the Mahatma brought the attentions of the masses in India towards the ideas that Gandhi found in South Africa. Gandhi’s stay in Africa made him an inclusive leader who would not discriminate against people on the basis of their regional, communal or caste identities. In the Indian popular imagination, Mahatma Gandhi is known for his contribution to India’s struggle for freedom. Indeed, the most-celebrated image of Gandhi symbolises non-violence and civil disobedience, which Gandhi found in South Africa. It was in Africa that Gandhi discovered himself, the self who later became an iconic figure for the world. The transformational narrative shows the journey undertaken by Gandhi and his evolution into Mahatma. The values he conceived and practised in Satyagraha made him Mahatma Gandhi. During his journey of self-discovery in South Africa, Gandhi as an individual interacted with his circumstances. It is through his constant struggle and negotiations with his (historical) circumstances that he came to make himself and also history. Gandhi matured as a political leader through his negotiations with the historic moment of which he was a part. The film is appropriately titled as The Making of Mahatma as the “making” can be “understood in all its fullness as a creative act in which personal circumstances and predilections interacted dynamically with the social, political, and cultural milieu within which Gandhi found himself in South Africa” (Needham 129). Gandhi, in his times and in contemporary times as well, ceased to be the name of an individual and has become synonymous with certain values and political beliefs. It is this image of the Mahatma in the imagination of the international community, which has inspired people. From Mandela to Martin Luther Jr. to Aung San Suu Kyi, the relevance of Gandhi’s ideas has been inspiring leaders in different parts of the world in different times. Gandhi’s life in Africa is relatively lesser known in the popular imagination. By adapting this chapter of Gandhi’s life into a film, Benegal does not merely bring a lesser-known narrative of Gandhi’s life into the popular imagination, he also establishes a historical and ideological connection between Indian and Africa. In the film, different images of Gandhi across different narratives can be seen acting upon one another. Although the film contributes to the image of Gandhi as a great personality, Benegal has also portrayed a realistic image of Gandhi as a man with his idiosyncrasies, contradictions and weaknesses. The film is not a hagiography of Gandhi, as it gives a balanced view of Gandhi by showing his human weaknesses while narrating his journey of becoming the Mahatma Gandhi. The film is based on a book by Fatima Meer, whose book draws on Gandhi’s autobiography My Experiments With Truth.17 Fatima Meer’s book is a tribute to Gandhi which highlights his stay in Africa and his growth as a leader of India. The film, an adaptation of Fatima Meer’s book, translates Fatima Meer’s Gandhi into Benegal’s Gandhi. Although the 116

A DA P T I N G H I S T O RY

book begins with detailed information about Gandhi’s family background in Gujarat, Benegal’s film focuses mainly on Gandhi’s growth in South Africa, a relatively marginalised narrative of Gandhi’s life, without giving information about Gandhi’ s background. To quote Anuradha D. Needham, “This is a Gandhi his grandson, Rajmohan Gandhi, describes as the ‘Gandhi you may not know’ – a characterization confirmed by scholars who, intent on recovering the South African Gandhi, remark on the marginalization of this Gandhi in the substantial body of mainstream and specialist scholarship on Gandhi, despite South Africa’s integral place in his political and personal formation” (Needham 2016: 128). While settling the case of the Muslim cousins, pleading other cases in the court and travelling in South Africa, he confronted the oppressive British laws, which he decided to resist on the insistence of Indians in Africa as they had found their leader in Gandhi. Taking up the cause of the Muslim brethren as fellow Indians remained a constant part of Gandhian politics even after his return to India, along with the issue of untouchability. Thus, the image of Gandhi in Benegal’s film acts upon other images of Gandhi, other narratives as in Mahatma Gandhi’s autobiography, Fatima Meer’s book and also Attenborough’s Gandhi. Kasturba’s voiceover addressing Mahatma Gandhi as “Bapu” in the film and the use of the song Vande Matram as part of the background song in the narrative establish the connection between the present and the past. Benegal’s film goes back from the present point of time/history in which Gandhi is venerated as a saintly figure and the father of the nation to the historical period in which Gandhi discovered himself. The narrative uncovers a part of Gandhi’s history, entwined with South Africa’s history, to (re) affirm Gandhi’s importance in history. The image of Gandhi, which emerged in Africa with the help of activism and Satyagraha, later helped Gandhi to carry out his struggle against the British in India. Gandhi was empowered by his weapon of Satyagraha and the image of Mahatma in his struggle against the British. Benegal highlights that aspect of Gandhi’s life which later made him Mahatma, who played an important role in the history of India and world alike.

Netaji Subhas Chandra Bose- the Forgotten Hero (2004) Made in 2004, Netaji Subhash Chandra Bose: The Forgotten Hero tells the story of a famous freedom fighter, Subhash Chandra Bose, popularly known as Netaji, who occupies an important place in the hearts of Indians and is remembered for his famous slogans such as Jai Hind, Dilli Chalo and Tum Mujhe Khoon Do Main Tumhe Azadi Doonga. The film was written by Shama Zaidi and Atul Tiwari; the music was composed by A.R. Rehman and the cinematography was produced by Rajan Kothari. It was released in November 2004 in London at the London Film Festival and in May 2005, it was released in India. Benegal pays tribute to Subhash C. Bose through his 117

A DA P T I N G H I S T O RY

film by bringing his contribution and struggle to popular culture. Benegal has once again made an attempt to assign importance to a marginal narrative. Divided into three parts along with the motto of the I.N.A. namely, Etmad or Faith; Ittefaq or Unity and Qurbaani or Sacrifice, the film tells the story Subhash C. Bose’s solitary journey towards raising an army to fight the British. The film begins with the surfacing of ideological differences between Mahatma Gandhi (Surendra Rajan) and Subhash C. Bose (Sachin Khadekar). The opening frame of the film shows Subhash C. Bose and Mahatma Gandhi in dialogue. But for these two personalities, there is nothing else significant in the frame highlighting the importance of this meeting between two leaders of India. Subhash C. Bose wants to follow the path of violence when the whole world is on the brink of war. Subhash C. Bose is of the opinion that non-violence was once a very effective weapon, but in the tumult of battle cries no one would listen to the flute of non-violence. Owing to their differencesGandhi asks Subhash C. Bose to resign from the position of President of the Indian National Congress, but it causes him great pain to do so. Mahatma Gandhi nevertheless wishes him well on his path to freedom struggle. In the next scene, Subhash C. Bose is in jail. Using the cover of Durga Puja, he succeeds in delivering a message to Sisir Kumar Bose (Jisshu Sengupta), who had come to visit him in the jail. Whilst there, Subhash C. Bose follows the Gandhian method by fasting to death to protest against his unjust arrest. Fearing that the dead Subhash C. Bose will be more dangerous than alive, the British administration submits before Bose’s protest. He is released from jail but is kept under house arrest. Every moment around his house is under constant surveillance by the police. Subhash C. Bose successfully deceives the police and in the disguise of Mohammad Ziauddin, an insurance agent, escapes and reaches Peshawar. The film shows his journey in detail from Calcutta to Peshawar revealing him as an expert in masquerading and disguising himself, which proves to be a useful asset for him in handling various situations later as well. After reaching Peshawar, he wishes to go to Russia. At Peshawar he is helped by a communist, Bhagat Ram Talwar (Raj Pal Yadav), a member of Kirti Kisan Party. Subhash C. Bose pretends to be Bhagat Ram Talwar’s uncle named Ziauddin Khan to cross the border. With the help of Mian Akbar Shah (Ahmed Khan), he is able to cross the border at the North Western Front. As shown in the film, people in Kabul are happy to know about Subhash C. Bose’s escape, indicating Subhash C. Bose’s popularity among the masses. In Kabul, Bose stays with Uttam Chand Malhotra (Kulbhushan Kharbanda), a comrade. In the meantime, Bhagat Ram Talwar meets a Russian agent to help Bose reach Moscow. Subhash C. Bose banks upon Russia’s animosity against the British. Owing to Bose’s views against communism, which he had given in the past, the Russian leader refuses to help him. As he found it difficult to get help from Russia, he found that the doors of Germany were opening for him. From Moscow, he goes to Rome and from there, he reaches Germany. 118

A DA P T I N G H I S T O RY

The next part of the film titled Ittefaq or Unity shows him in Berlin. This part of the narrative relates Bose’s stay in Germany, his political activities and personal life there. In Berlin, Bose meets Abid Hassan (Rajit Kapoor), whom he had met five years before as a member of the Congress party. Bose is attached to the Special Bureau of India, where he starts Azad Hind Radio. In Berlin, he creates the Indian Legion consisting of about 4,500 prisoners of war, who had earlier fought for the British in Africa and were captured by the Axis forces. He wants the Axis powers to recognise his government in exile and give him an army of 50,000 soldiers, which he thought would give Indians working for the British army in India a convincing reason to stand against the British. Subhash C. Bose, in the film, is shown to be relying too much upon an armed struggle against the British. The film focuses on Bose’s plans to enter India with an army, which Bose thought would inspire all Indian soldiers working for the British Empire. Subhash C. Bose’s association with Hitler is known to all, but handling this scene was a tight-rope walk for Benegal, which he handles masterfully. The film builds the argument that when Subhash C. Bose could not get any help from communist Russia, he had no choice left but to look to Fascist Italy and Nazi Germany. Subhash C. Bose in the film is shown to be aware that it would not be wise to trust the Nazis; but following the dictum that it takes poison to kill poison, he shakes hands with the Nazi, hoping that it would also open the door to Russia for him. However, his plans are thwarted when he learns that Germany has attacked Russia, which, in the film, Bose considers to be a strategic mistake. While in Germany, Bose creates the Indian legion, members of which were there as prisoners of war of the Axis forces, who had been captured from Africa where they were fighting for the British. In Germany, Bose has a daughter with Emilie Schenkl, whom he had met when he visited the country earlier in 1934. When Bose learns that Germany attacked Russia, he realises that his dream of entering India through Russia has been thwarted. He meets officials of the Japanese Embassy in Berlin in order to start his journey from Japan. Bose reaches Asia by travelling via the Cape of Good Hope. The remainder of the film shows battles fought by the Indian National Army (I.N.A.) under Bose’s leadership. The film shows the determination and bravery with which the soldiers of I.N.A. fought on various fronts. Despite the half-hearted support from Japan, the soldiers of I.N.A. decided to march towards the front. I.N.A. fights important battles at the Haka-Falam front arriving there via Kohima. The film portrays various battles fought by the soldiers of the I.N.A. such as at Kohima; the Chindwin River in 1944; Pallel Airfield; Manipur; the railway line of Dimapore and Mount Popa. This section of the film also focuses on the betrayal of the Japanese forces to the I.N.A. In the nationalist strain, the film also shows the scene where the national flag, designed after the flag of Indian National Congress at Moirang, Manipur on April 6, 1944 is hoisted. Bose’s spirits are crushed when he learns that America 119

A DA P T I N G H I S T O RY

has dropped an atom bomb at Hiroshima. He locks himself in a room and goes into meditation. Soon he is given the news that another atom bomb has been dropped at Nagasaki too and Japan has agreed to surrender. He realises that he and the I.N.A. are isolated against the Allied Forces. He decides to disband the army to save the soldiers from becoming prisoners of war. He boards a plane from Saigon Airport on August 17, 1945. In the next scene, his wife in Vienna hears on the radio the news of his death in a plane crash. The film places Subhash Chandra Bose in the larger nationalistic discourse. Rich in historical information, especially battles fought by the I.N.A., the film shows different facets of Bose’s character. He is shown as a military leader, a nationalist and a lover. The film reveals his contribution to the freedom of India, which he fights with a lover’s passion. He has a dream of raising an army and winning India’s freedom. The idea of India’s freedom and his desire to raise an army to fight against the British in the Second World War was so strong that he ultimately shakes hands with Hitler. It is difficult to relate the details of the meeting between Hitler and Bose, but the film shows the meeting from a nationalist position. During the meeting with Hitler (Udo Schenk), Bose expresses his displeasure with Hitler’s programme for Aryan superiority but after their brief meeting, as shown in the film, Hitler promises to help Bose. Bose, who depended on Hitler’s support in his struggle against the British forces, is shown to be daring and audacious in the way in which he expresses his opinion about Hitler, who at the time, was at the height of his power. Benegal’s nationalist position can be seen in the way in which Col. Laxmi Sehgal’s death has been portrayed. Although the pieces of historical evidence show that the soldiers of the I.N.A. under the leadership of Col. Sehgal surrendered, the film, depicts a defeat with corpses lying on the battleground instead of the surrender. In the film, Bose continues to deeply respect Mahatma Gandhi. Even when Mahatma Gandhi refuses to forgive Bose for his ideological differences, Bose harbours no resentment against Bapu Gandhi. Bose understands that the differences between him and Mahatma Gandhi exist purely on an ideological level. He appreciates Gandhi for his being a successful mass leader. This becomes evident in the scene when he is in Berlin, reading about Mahatma Gandhi’s call for “Do or Die”, he feels that at this important moment, he should have been with Gandhi ji in India. His love and respect for Bapu Gandhi, and how deeply he felt associated with the Congress becomes evident by his naming different battalions of the I.N.A. after the names of Mahatma Gandhi, Jawaharlal Nehru and Azad. Moreover, he addresses the I.N.A. with Mahatma Gandhi’s photograph in the backdrop. Made in 2004 and 2005, at the time of the government of the United Progressive Alliance (U.P.A.) was headed by a Congress leader, it is clear that Benegal intended to convey ideological affiliations with the dominant nationalist discourse of that time. The film does not give much coverage of Bose’s rise as a leader, his part of the triumvirate of Gandhi-Nehru-Bose nor his ideological conflicts with 120

A DA P T I N G H I S T O RY

Mahatma Gandhi. By avoiding that conflict, even on ideological grounds, and maintaining silence over Bose’s role in organising the All India Forward Bloc and its activities, Benegal refrains from disturbing the existing order in which Mahatma Gandhi and Jawaharlal Nehru occupy important positions. Following the nationalist ideology, Benegal presents Bose, not as an ideologue or a visionary, but rather, simply as a nationalist and a freedom fighter. Benegal is more interested in telling us the story of Subhash C. Bose, a relatively minor figure compared to Gandhi, Nehru and Patel in the popular imagination, without undermining the position Gandhi and Nehru enjoyed in the narrative of India. In the film, Bose emerges as a leader, an astute army general, a patriot and also a lover. The film explores different aspects of his personality. He is portrayed as a dynamic leader, supporter of women’s emancipation, openminded liberal intellectual with a religious orientation. He understands international politics; the impact of various events in the international politics of India; the shrewd diplomacy of European countries and is equally aware that the Indian Legion should not be abused by Hitler when Bose is away from Berlin. As an inspiring leader he is able to fill the prisoners with confidence, self-esteem and the spirit of patriotism and is equally compassionate towards his soldiers. He marries Emilie, the woman he loves. He is shown to be furious when he learns that he cannot register his marriage in Germany as Hitler does not approve of inter-racial marriages. Emilie decides to go to Vienna as staying there with Bose would have come in his way. He silently bears his love for Emilie when he is away from her during wartime. There are instances shown in the film which reveal how much he misses her. Benegal shows Bose principally as a nationalist hero as well as a lover: his love for his country and his love for Emilie are both powerful themes in the film. Bose’s commitment to his country’s cause does not eclipse his love for Emilie, nor does his love for Emilie distract him from the path of freedom struggle. Before leaving Germany, he sends a letter to his family telling them about Emilie and their daughter. Like a romantic lover, he carries the pain of separation in his heart without disclosing it to the world. Bose – the lover and the patriot, continues to conduct his business affairs without letting anyone know of his romantic affair. On one occasion he is unjustly accused by Laxmi of failing to understand the pain of separation. The camera shows Bose’s expression signifying the pain he suffers, but he remains silent. He carries his love for Emilie until his last breath. Subhash C. Bose’s association with Hitler and Japan during World War II does cast a controversial shadow over him. As Russia opposes imperialism, Bose, in the film, counts on Russia to help him raise an army of revolutionaries to fight against the British. Russia refuses because he had announced earlier at a political rally that India was not ready for communism. Consequently, Bose has no other choice but to look to Germany and Italy, two important countries ruled by dictators. His acceptance of help from Nazi 121

A DA P T I N G H I S T O RY

Germany can be interpreted as his failure to distinguish between fascist and communist ideologies. The film shows him using the simple logic of “my enemy’s enemy is my friend”. Furthermore, Bose is shown to be so driven by the idea of raising an army that he makes simplistic binary definitions, violent and non-violent modes of protest. He fails to show a nuanced understanding of ideology and the use of violence in the struggle. But his daughter, Anita Bose Pfaff, thinks differently. She claims British analysts have vilified his subsequent meetings with Hitler, Mussolini and the Japanese government as evidence of Netaji’s socalled fascist leanings. Quite the opposite was true. A Left wing activist to the end of his days, he held no brief for Hitler and Mussolini’s racist and fascist ideologies and viewed his relationship with them purely in the context of India’s freedom struggle. (Anita Bose Pfaff May 11, 2005)18 However, the files of Netaji, released by the Prime Minister of India in 2015, and made available in the public domain, reveal that Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru, the first Prime Minister of India, appears to be sympathetic and compassionate towards Emilie Schenkl and Anita. , the daughter of Emilie and Bose which perhaps suggests that he did not condemn Bose completely.19 The film tells the saga of one man’s struggle against his own circumstances and also against the British Empire. His pain, fight and commitment to persist in his lonely journey has been encapsulated in the famous Bangla song Ekle Chalo (meaning ‘Walk alone, if there is no one else walking along with you), which is played throughout the narrative. The non-diegetic song becomes an integral part of the narrative. Subhash C. Bose started his journey alone when he took a different path to Mahatma Gandhi. He fought hard against the British forces on various fronts. The patriot and the lover silently nurtured a deep love for his country as well as a deep love for his wife. He fought his cause alone much of the time. His fight ended abruptly with his premature death. According to Sugata Bose, the grand-nephew of Subhas C. Bose and a historian, Bose’s image has been sullied in the West because of his affiliation with the Axis forces. Bose is considered a traitor by the British.20 The film depicts the trial of three officers of the I.N.A. namely, Shahnawaz Khan, Colonel Prem Sehgal and Gurbax Singh Dhillon – a Muslim, a Hindu and a Sikh. The trial on the one hand shows how Bose’s I.N.A. and its officers were perceived by the British; and on the other, it also highlights Bose’s idea of an inclusive India in which people from different communities and identities could be brought together. Benegal, without being polemical about Bose’s status in the narrative of Indian history, portrays his life and struggle. Benegal has told the story of a forgotten national hero while also showing his struggle without commentary. Benegal has portrayed Bose’s passionate commitment 122

A DA P T I N G H I S T O RY

to his cause, his patriotism and his ever-present pain. The film spans the period from the point Bose parts ways with Gandhi until his untimely death There is an ambivalent relationship between Subhas C. Bose and the hegemonic narrative of the history of India dominated by Gandhi and Jawaharlal Nehru. In the popular understanding of the history of the freedom struggle, the blame for relegating Bose is conveniently attributed to the leaders of the Congress. Anita Bose Pfaff decries the cold attitude shown by the Congress government after India’s independence when the soldiers of the I.N.A. were not inducted into the Indian army. “Pfaff accuses India of being ‘unwilling to give INA soldiers recognition . . . until 1979 when there was a Janata government’” (Pfaff in an interview in Bangalore Mirror dated October 29, 2017).21 Shashi Tharoor too in his novel The Great Indian Novel imagines Subhashh C. Bose as Karna in the Mahabharata, a character in the epic who has been denied his rightful position in society. However, Bose caught attention when Sh. Narendra Modi, the Prime Minister of India, chose to declassify his files of in 2015. There are many declassified files available which throw light on various issues pertaining to Bose in independent India. These include discussions about his disappearance and death; the Justice Mukherjee Commission; the transfer of his ashes from Japan to India; the parliamentary question regarding his death; the construction of memorials to him and the I.N.A.in Delhi as well as the conferring of the Bharat Ratna Award on him. In the same file, names of J.R.D. Tata, Maulana Abul Kalam Azad and Morarji Desaiare are also mentioned; the issue of Anita’s citizenship is also discussed. This demonstrates that the matter of Subhash Chandra Bose has never been forgotten in the closed quarters of the Parliament of India.22 The Government of India has been pursuing the matter since the times of Pt. Jawaharlal Nehru, the first Prime Minister of India. Netaji’s life represents the pain of a marginalised figure who is never accorded his rightful status in society. Like the protagonist of the film, the film’s reviews were also ambivalent. When the film was released, it faced some resistance for its controversial content. The most controversial of them was revealing Bose’s secret marriage with an Austrian woman. On this account, the film was criticised by the All India Forward Bloc. Subhash C. Bose is another nationalist figure in Indian history who played a very important role in India’s struggle but who is largely forgotten in the predominant narrative of India’s fight for freedom. Benegal’s film reminds the people of the story of Subhash C. Bose, the forgotten hero. By means of the detailed narrative of Subhash C. Bose’s circumstances, his struggle and his battles against the British Empire, Bose is accorded an important position in the narrative of India’s struggle for freedom, which has otherwise been denied to him. The film redeems Bose as a patriot. Benegal's objective is not to disturb the order of the state, nor to compromise Bose’s stature as a national hero, but rather to simply tell his story. To conclude, the relationship between the film and the history is not merely at the level of the visual or sound of cinema. The mere visible does 123

A DA P T I N G H I S T O RY

not constitute the truth in cinema. The image of historical biopics is not the visualisation of an incident of history, it is rather an interactive and creative engagement of “images”. There are certain incidents which are supplemented to the film narrative which are fictional. Instead of entering into a debate of the purity and impurity of history, it is more important to understand, in Rosestone’s terms “what kind of historical thinking” is taking place in the narrative. In the film, The Making of the Mahatma, there is an interaction between Fatima Meer’s perception of Mahatma Gandhi and Shyam Benegal’s Mahatma Gandhi. Similarly, there are some incidents in Netaji Subhash C. Bose: The Forgotten Hero which may not be historically true.23 But historical truism is not the task of a filmmaker. What is required is to understand what particular ideology is being examined in a historical film or historical biopic or what discourse is being played out in the film. There is nothing original or primary and hence, nothing is derivative. As understood by Deleuze, the adaptation of history in films is also “a translation in space” (Deleuze 1986: 8). With the change in the duration “also comes a qualitative change in the Whole” (Deleuze 1986: 8). The “Whole” is open and owing to its nature, it allows itself to change. Every adaptation of history contributes something to the “Whole”, changing it forever and keeping it in a state of flux. With every adaptation and new telling, the “Whole” also “becomes”. The relationship between narrative, history and image is that of a process. In the larger narrative of history, the movement-image of cinema destabilises the fixed and static nature of history. History rather “becomes”. The “becoming of history” is a never-ending process. It is always in a state of flux and constantly changing, evolving and adding new interpretations to itself. History in a constant dialogue with the past in the light of the present – the unearthing of new facts and the looking at the past from a new perspective.

Notes 1 Parts of Chapter X previously appeared in S.K. Chaudhuri and R. Samaddar, ReFocus: The Films of Shyam Benegal, (Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 2020). 2 Hayden White discusses the debate between Anglo-American philosophers and the Annales School. 3 The idea of the historical biopic, while discussing the representation of Mahatma Gandhi, was first presented by the author in a conference organised by the Association of Adaptation Studies held at St. Anne’s College, Oxford on September 26 and 27, 2016. 4 The author has contributed an article titled Adapting Gandhi/Kasturba in The Making of the Mahatma to an anthology to The Films of Shyam Benegal to be edited by Sneha Kar Chaudhury and Ramit Samaddar. The anthology is a part of theReFocus series on international filmmakers. The series editors are Dr. Gary D. Rhodes and Dr. Robert Singer, and the series will be published by Edinburgh University Press. The primary focus of the paper is to study the representation of Kasturba Gandhi in The Making of Mahatma, which is substantially different from the focus of this chapter, but the paper also discusses the relationship

124

A DA P T I N G H I S T O RY

5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13

14 15 16 17

18 19 20 21 22 23

between films and history. Some theoretical ideas used in the paper reappear in this chapter. The anthology has not been printed at the time this book went to print. The author has taken care not to repeat the same words in the chapter. Parts of Chapter 4 previously appeared in S.K. Chaudhuri and R. Samaddar, ReFocus: The Films of Shyam Benegal (Edinburgh University Press: Edinburgh 2020). Ibid. Ibid. The phrase “playing the English gentleman” has been borrowed from Mahatma Gandhi’s autobiography, My Experiments with Truth. For details, see the book by Fatima Meer. The film has also shown some of these laws. Also discussed in the article titled Adapting Gandhi/Kasturba in The Making of the Mahatma to an anthology to The Films of Shyam Benegal to be edited by Sneha Kar Chaudhury and Ramit Samaddar. Ibid. The Movement-Image and the Time-Image are two important works by Deleuze on cinema. Although Kasturba has been given a “voice” in the narrative, the voice is paradoxical. According to Needham, Kasturba speaks about Gandhi, not herself. Gandhi’s interactions with his wife and son in the personal sphere bring out contradictions in his personality. Also discussed in the article titled Adapting Gandhi/Kasturba in The Making of the Mahatma to an anthology to The Films of Shyam Benegal to be edited by Sneha Kar Chaudhury and Ramit Samaddar. Translation is mine. Paul Ricoeur’s concept of mimesis 1, mimesis 2 and mimesis 3 is also important to understand the temporal relationship between history and its adaptation. Gandhi wrote his autobiography almost ten years after coming back from South Africa entirely from memory. Markovits has questioned the authenticity of memory being the basis of the autobiographical narrative. Despite the unreliability of memory, the image of Gandhi that appeared in his autobiography helped him to project an image of himself in the public domain. With acerbic honesty he narrates certain events from his childhood and adult life in his autobiography. The overwhelming conclusion from this study is the belief in Gandhi’s brutal honesty and sincerity in overcoming his sexual urgesto grow into a Mahatma. Published between the years 1925 to 1929, the image of “Mahatma” helped him to elevate his stature in the eyes of the people and his wider acceptance as a respected leader of India’s nationalist movement. Anita Bose Pfaff’s interview has been published in India Abroad. www.rediff. com/news/2005/may/11inter.htm. For details, go to https://thewire.in/history/netaji-files-family-nehru. Historical documents reveal that he was called a traitor by the British, but not a war criminal. For details, see the full interview by Ruhi Khan. https://bangaloremirror.indiatimes. com/opinion/sunday-read/to-have-an-iconic-dad-is-of-course-difficult-says-anitabose-pfaff-netaji-Subhashh-chandra-boses-daughter/articleshow/61310936.cms. All those files can be accessed at www.netajipapers.gov.in/. Rudolf Hartog’s The Sign of the Tiger, however, presents a different account of the meeting between Hitler and Subhash C. Bose than that presented in the film.

125

5 CONTESTATIONS WITH INDIAN MODERNITY

The movement from tradition to modernity makes for very exciting times. As a filmmaker, it’s extraordinary because every moment there’s a new story to tell. Apart from the old stories, there are constant new stories, new narratives to be completed. – Shyam Benegal (“Subliminal Persuasion” 74)

Modernity and enlightenment are closely connected, the discussion around which began in the West in the fifteenth century. The ideas of modernity such as reason, science, progress, secularism and the art of inquiry dominated the western world until the Second World War. The Renaissance brought about the revival of classical literary works and philosophers intellectually empowered mankind to reject the dominance of religion and faith, which had been so prominent since the Middle Ages. The philosophical foundation of modernity was laid down by philosophers such as Hume, Locke, Kant, Voltaire, Descartes and Rousseau. Their ideas pushed the western world from its intellectual slumber, the darkness of ignorance, superstitions and religious dogmatism and into the world of knowledge, inquiry, questioning and the “light of reason”. The scientific developments from the sixteenth to the eighteenth centuries contributed to making the Industrial Revolution a reality, which introduced new modes of economic production. The Industrial Revolution resulted in a new social order and new gender roles were defined. The French Revolution sowed the seeds of a new political order too. The Treaty of Westphalia in 1648; the American War of Independence (1775–1783) and the period after the French Revolution (1789) gave the people a new political consciousness. The people revolted not only against the oppressive and exploitative monarchy, but also against the religious order. In addition, western society began to move away from religion towards secularism, a process which had initially started with the Renaissance and Humanism almost three to four centuries earlier. Modernity began to be associated not only with everything that was new, but with new ideas,

126

C O N T E S TAT I O N S W I T H I N D I A N M O D E R N I T Y

new social and political orders, and with the hope that the world could be changed. Moving away from religious thinking, it was understood that “through secular thinking man can free himself from dogmas and prejudices and create a new world order” (Pathak 2013: 18). India’s tryst with modernity began during the period of colonial rule, which makes the nature of Indian modernity ambivalent, paradoxical and debatable. Modernity as an ideology seems to be “premised upon fundamental ruptures: a surpassing of traditions, a break with medieval” (Dube 2009: 2). The consciousness of new political orders, new ideas, changes in old social practices and eradicating traditional social evils began to develop during the colonial period. One reaction to British-imposed modernity was a complete rejection of Western ideas and ways of life, and also a shift to return to the traditional Indian way of life. A second one was to retain Indianness while modernising it in conjunction with Western scientific ideas. Deana Heath, referring to Partha Chaterrjee, builds her argument that, Indian nationalists had initially attempted to create a nationalism and with it a modernity that was anti-Western through selectively appropriating certain aspects of Western modernity while splitting the domain of civil society and declaring the ‘spiritual’ domain (that of intellect, language, culture, education, and the family) as its sovereign territory from which colonial power and Western culture were excluded. (Heath 2009: 409). The Bengal Renaissance or the Bengali Renaissance, a social, cultural and artistic movement, was one of the significant forces of modernity in India. Raja Ram Mohan Roy, Ishwar Chander Vidyasagar, Bankim Chander Chatterjee, Swami Vivekananda, Devendranath Tagore, Rabindranath Tagore to name a few, were prominent figures of the Bengali Renaissance. Derozio or De Rozario, who was a teacher at Hindu College, Calcutta, was a great influence on his young students. The group of his young students was also known as the “Young Bengal”. Both Derozio and Raja Ram Mohan Roy were instrumental in introducing Western scientific and rational thinking to India. They spoke and worked passionately to alter the traditional Indian way of life and thinking.1 On the other hand, Ishwar Chander Vidyasagar, the “traditional moderniser”, Swami Vivekananda and Bankim Chander Chatterjee moved constantly between the Western and Indian world. In their ideas, they sought to blend Indian old thought with new Western ideas. They did not reject Indian tradition outrightly, rather they believed in mixing the best of the two worlds into one. Outside Bengal, Swami Dayananda, the founder of Arya Samaj, also made efforts to reform Hindu society by reviving the ancient Vedic way of life. Historically, Bhakti-Sufi poets in the past have raised their voice against social evils. In the poetry of Kabir, Surdas,

127

C O N T E S TAT I O N S W I T H I N D I A N M O D E R N I T Y

Namdev, Guru Nanak and others, consciousness against social evils from within the religious space has been heightened; but during the nineteenth and twentieth centuries, social and religious reformers were contesting Western modernity. Many Indian leaders educated in the West, which also exposed them to Western ideas. Indian political leaders such as Tilak, Nehru and Gandhi also drew inspiration from Indian and Western thought. After independence, the impulse to modernise India continued to unsettle Indian social and political leaders. Social, religious and political leaders contributed to Indian modernity while clinging on to some traditional practices. There were many challenges that young India as a nation was facing. Engagement with modern Western ideas, while retaining the old Indian ways, determined the ambivalent nature of Indian modernity. Jawaharlal Nehru had dreamt of modern India based on modern science and technology; whereas the India of Mahatma Gandhi’s dreams dwelt in villages. In the Nehruvian vision, the responsibility of building modern India was to be equally borne by political leaders and scientists. “For Nehru, science was both universal and national” (Arnold 2013: 363). By national it does not mean that he conceived a notion of “Indian Science” as science to him was beyond all boundaries and borders. It was national because it was one of the central pillars on which the building of modern India was to stand after India’s independence.2 Building new India on science, rationality and technology put the traditional values, beliefs and notions in direct conflict with the new. Nehru’s engagement with science or scientific thought was part and parcel of his democratic socialist India.3 “The Nehruvian vision of science was intended to replace the imperial ideology of the colonial services (dedicated to upholding empire) with an ideology of science as the means by which the modern nation could free itself from the incubus of custom and overcome deprivation and backwardness” (Arnold 2013: 366). Building new cities like Chandigarh, Bhubaneshwar and Gandhinagar, therefore, became spatial metaphors for new India.4 Vinobha Bhave and many other Gandhian thinkers tried to find solutions to the problems of India in ancient Indian spirituality. New modes of production, the vision of state socialism, emphasis on scientific thought has co-existed in India with faith, religion and even superstition, which gives a complex and paradoxical complexion to Indian modernity, which was dealing with social, economic, political and cultural issues. Democratic outlook, scientific temper and belief in an egalitarian society demanded thinkers and political leaders to address various issues of independent India. There were issues of land reform, political resistance to the oppressive feudal system, social upliftment of the backward groups of Indian society and the fight against superstition and orthodoxy. While India was marching towards modernity, the old order continued to exist and assert itself. Rational thinking questioned religious dogmas and superstitions. Modernity in the form of industrialisation and economic 128

C O N T E S TAT I O N S W I T H I N D I A N M O D E R N I T Y

reforms threatened the existence of traditional workers, sharecroppers and artisans. The new capital-based-economic-order was ready to erase centuries-old traditional craft and artisans. Democracy, as a social and political order, is based on the principle of equality irrespective of caste, creed and class. The paradox lies in the existence of caste, class and genderbased discrimination in a free and supposedly modern democratic India. As the new socio-political ideology believed in empowering the low caste, poor farmers or sharecroppers, the traditional feudal order/zamindari system either resisted the change or tried to co-opt the land reforms to its advantage. People have been initiated into modern technology in its various forms to navigate in the public sphere, while they cling onto their traditions in their private spheres. The narrative of Indian modernity is neither of gradual self-evolution, nor is there any radical eruption. It is a story of constant negotiations between the old and the new. In Indian modernity, both orders – the old and the new – exist and assert themselves. Indian society wishes to be secular, but faith continues to exercise a powerful position in society; there is democracy in the country, but the feudal mentality continues to exist; women have become professionals, but are also expected to play the conventional role of a homemaker. These narratives can be seen as failures of Indian modernity or can also be seen as the narratives of the “mistaken modernity”’5 of India. In every story of modernity in India, its failings can also be seen. There are no clear breaks with the past; rather there are constant negotiations. In the matrix of Indian modernity, the old and the new simultaneously exist, not necessarily picking the best of the two. Each case has a unique complexion and dynamics. There are contradictions, paradoxes and negotiations in the narrative of India’s modernity; simultaneously there are also narratives of social change, which Benegal has captured in some of his films. This chapter is a study of all such films which give us the narrative of changing India in which the old and the new are competing with each other. This contestation cannot be understood as resistance or empowerment as in the films discussed in the first chapter. Some films discussed in this chapter do show signs of social change, but change is not radical. It is slow, gradual and limited. There are tales of suffering, struggle, grit and determination. In these tales, heroism lies in surviving in spite of extraordinary circumstances. Films discussed in this chapter were made from 1978 to the early 1990s, a period which covers the span of a little more than 40 years after India’s independence, before India adopted the policy of free market in the 1990s. India underwent major economic and political changes in the 1980s. This decade observed the introduction of privatisation, suppression of trade unions and the rise of religion-based political ideology. In all the films under examination in this chapter, different shades of Indian modernity can be seen. There are the stories of India’s contestations with modernity in different time periods. From the conflict between religion-based superstition and modernity 129

C O N T E S TAT I O N S W I T H I N D I A N M O D E R N I T Y

to changing socio-political structures, land reforms and socio-religious reform movements, there are various facets and shades of Indian modernity discussed in this chapter. It focuses on issues that unsettled India after independence as it embarked on the path of modernity, as narrated by Shyam Benegal.

Kondura (1978) Kondura or Anugraham is a bilingual film made in Hindi and Telagu. The film is an adaptation of a Marathi novel titled Kondura written by Chintamani Tryambak Khanolkar. The screenplay was written by Shyam Benegal and Girish Karnad. Chintamani T. Khanolkar wrote poetry under the pen name of Arati Prabhu and prose under his real name. He was awarded the Sangeet Natak Akademi Award in 1976 and Sahitya Akademi Award in 1978. His first novel, Ratra Kali Ghagar Kali, was published in 1962. He rose to fame with Kondura first published in 1966. His other famous works are Trishanku (1968), Gnuraya Ani Chani (1970). Besides Kondura, his play Kalay Tasmai Namaha has been adapted into a Hindi film titled Ankahee, directed by Amol Palekar in 1985. Khanolkar, in most of his novels, has dealt with the themes of religion, superstitions, the conflict between good and evil, godly powers and the loss of mankind from humanity. Kondura, or the God of the Sea, is the story of a young priest, Parshurama (Anant Naag), who is married to Ansuya (Vanisri). He depends upon his brother to support his family, which is a bone of contention between the two brothers. Once Parshurama is rebuked by his elder brother and in a fit of fury, Parshurama declares that he would not return to the village. As he is leaving the village, he comes across Kondura, the mythical sage or the God of Sea. The sage-god gives him a boon, like a dried root, supposedly imbued with magical powers. The boon has the power of ending any unwanted pregnancy. Parshurama is warned to use this boon judiciously and also instructed to practise celibacy lest the boon should lose its powers. Kondura also makes a prophecy that Parshurama will play an important role in removing evil from the village. Parshurama returns home. He doubts his meeting with Kondura, the sage-god. In order to check if it was Kondura himself, he asks a man in the village to find water near his house. This man had been granted a blessing by Kondura to find water with magical powers. He uses his magical power and asks Parshurama to dig a well at a particular spot near the house, where the water is eventually found. Parshurama is left with no other choice but to believe in Kondura’s power. At night when everybody is asleep, Parshurama suddenly wakes up hearing the sound of temple bells chiming. He goes to the temple of the village where he finds that the temple bells are not moving. There in the temple, Parshurama sees the goddess in his wife’s form. The goddess also tells Parshurama that sin is gradually increasing in the village. In order to save the village, he must complete the temple repair work and move the temple from its present position as quickly as possible. 130

C O N T E S TAT I O N S W I T H I N D I A N M O D E R N I T Y

Parshurama goes to the village landlord for financial assistance. To his surprise, the feudal lord immediately agrees to help him. The village landlord, Bhairavmoorthy (Shekar Chatterjee), is a womaniser and tyrant. The villagers believed that he committed incest with his younger brother’s wife. He has a wife with whom he could not have a child. His brother and his brother’s wife died leaving their son behind, which the locals believe to be Bhairavmoorthy’s son. Vasu, Bhairavmoorthy’s alleged illegitimate son, is afflicted with a physical disability. He is married to a poor but beautiful woman, Parvati (Smita Patil). Bhairavmoorthy watches Parvati, but she is morally strong and upright enough to resist him. Parshurama gradually rises in popularity as a powerful godman. He begins to have his own followers. It is commonly known among the people that the goddess visits him and he abstains from an active sexual life. Parshurama is simultaneously tormented by his fantasy and desire for Parvati. Parshurama felt attracted towards her when he saw her for the first time. In the meantime, every time the goddess appears before him, she asks Parshurama to remove sin from the village. One night the goddess tells him that Parvati’s pregnancy is the sin tormenting the village. He announces to Bhairavmoorthy his plans to remove the sin, to which Bhairavmoorthy agrees and also confesses that he is a sinner. Parshurama makes Parvati drink the potion he has prepared from the boon given to him by Kondura. After the act is over, Bhairavmoorthy reveals to Parshurama how he had hoodwinked Parshurama to end Parvati’s pregnancy. Once Parshurama realises his mistake, he is tormented by the idea of having committed a sin. He pleads before his wife to transform into the form of the goddess. Finally, Parshurama breaks his vow of celibacy and makes love to his wife thinking that this would break the effect of the boon. His wife holds herself responsible for her husband’s renouncing his celibacy. She jumps in the well outside their house and dies. When in the morning, Parshurama discovers that his wife has ended her life, he runs away from the village in search of Kondura shouting his name, but Kondura never appears. The narrative is structured around categories of superstitions, religiosity, faith in divine powers and modern rationality. But for the teacher (Satyadev Dubey) in the village, there is no one else who represents the voice of rationality in the narrative. The narrator does not take an outright position against superstitions and religion, but presents the world of faith and superstition in a manner to encourage viewers think critically about them. Old myths are being dismantled by the new myths, but they are not completely demolished. The protagonist, Parshurama, is a religious man in this narrative. Owing to his ability to see the goddess, he dismantles the seat of authority of the previous priest of the temple. Parshurama also shatters the myth that if anyone sees the goddess, they would go blind – rather, by not losing his eyesight, he establishes himself as a holy man in the village. Parshurama is also able to dismantle the mound of snakes from the premises of the temple. 131

C O N T E S TAT I O N S W I T H I N D I A N M O D E R N I T Y

Despite dismantling and dislocating the older order, the film does not completely reject the religious order; rather the old religious order is replaced by the new order. Nevertheless, the narrative provides insight into the hypocrisies of religiosity and exposes the contradictions in religiosity from within. The ideological position of the narrator is that of an outsider, who looks at religiosity as a rationalist. Without making any overt declaration, the narrator leaves it to the viewers to decode the implication behind the narration. Parshurama, who practises celibacy to remain a holy man, is tormented by his desire for Parvati. Every night he would dream of her. He becomes a typical example of Freudian suppression and sublimation of desire. As he suffers from an inferiority complex and is often chided by his elder brother for being a failure in handling practical affairs of the world, his self-esteem suffers. The different visions he has reflect his anxiety to gain the lost self-esteem and to give meaning to his existence. His vision of Kondura is a part of the process and his sexual desires are sublimated into the divine vision of the goddess in the form of his wife, whom he is trying to push away from his real world and later Parvati, the woman he desires. Parshurama is not able to differentiate his suppressed desires from his fantasy. He is only conscious of his desire for Parvati burning in his heart. When he tries to smother the fire of passion by taking a bath at night, the goddess appears in front of him and asks him to remove sin from the village. Parshurama is almost convinced that the goddess is hinting at Parvati’s pregnancy, but he looks for certification and a guarantee of the sin from the goddess, which he eventually receives. In Freudian terms, it is Parshurama’s own desire for Parvati which encourages him to interpret sin in Parvati’s pregnancy. To him, Parvati’s pregnancy means that another man (his rival) had taken the position that Parshurama would have liked to take himself. The conceptualised other man becomes the reason for of Parvati’s illegitimate pregnancy and suggested incest. Parshurama suffers from an inferiority complex as he is not considered to be good enough for any worldly mission. His lack of self-esteem is compensated by raising his position in society with the help of newly found religiosity. His status as a godman gives him the position of respectability that he has been longing for. But there is a price for this. As deeply rooted in the Indian collective unconscious, spiritual richness is earned by resisting sexual desires, and so he takes the vow of celibacy. As he suppresses his desire for his wife, he starts hearing divine sounds in the form of temple bells, which is nothing but the surfacing of cultural concepts buried in his psyche. The dynamics of suppressing his desire for his wife is like a doubleedged sword. One the one hand, it helps him attain a higher position in the village; on the other, his desire is transferred to another woman, Parvati, which naturally compromises his status. Parshurama, confused, starts hallucinating, which he mistakenly misconstrues to be the visions of the goddess. After he satisfies his desire with his wife, he stops hearing the sound of 132

C O N T E S TAT I O N S W I T H I N D I A N M O D E R N I T Y

bells chiming in his ears. But his coming to his senses is juxtaposed with the death of his wife, which he is not able to endure. Shocked and scared, he runs away from the village calling Kondura’s name. Through the paradoxical and complex character of Parshurama, the narrative questions man’s faith in supernatural powers and religiosity derived from such faith. The narrator does not offer an overt critique of religiosity, but it is through the subtle narration and the complex character of the protagonist that the narrator gives a critique of such self-delusionary religiosity. The narrative presents the viewer with faith as practised by the illiterate and ignorant while exposing the hypocrisies of the feudal and religious order thriving under the patronage of the landlord. The narrative offers a critique of such an ideology which through its social and religious institutions, subjugates the poor and illiterate. They do not have the consciousness, nor do they have the courage, to challenge the authority of both – the landlord and the priest. Vasu, in the domestic sphere of Bhairavmoorthy, represents oppressed humanity. He has accepted the authority of the landlord. He is challenged only by Parvati, but her position is weakened by her gender in a patriarchal system. Bhairavmoorthy’s mother is criticised and demeaned for her infertility and Parvati is accused of being a loose woman as she is carrying a child against the wishes of Bhairavmoorthy. Religion here comes here to work according to the designs of the lord is removing Parvati’s pregnancy. Bhairavmoorthy has used the power of Parshurama to end Parvati’s pregnancy. Parshurama believes that he has been given special powers by the God and the goddess asks him to remove the evil from the village. His ideas and notions of sin and virtue, as defined by religion, are used by the feudal lord. In a society which believes in superstitions, there are some events which convince the viewer that Parshurama had some magical powers because of the boon given to him by Kondura. Moreover, another man blessed by Kondura is always able to find the location of water with his magical powers. Parshurama believes in the story of Kondura and his boon. The same Parshurama, who had earlier exposed the hypocrisy of the temple priest and challenged his position of authority in the temple, later fails to see whether Parvati is innocent or not. Parshurama realises that he has made a mistake by ending Parvati’s pregnancy, which is his failure as a holy man. Parshurama’s failure becomes an opportunity to question whether he saw the vision of the goddess. Parshurama neither sees Kondura at the end, nor does he appreciate whether the boon given to him actually had some powers or not. It is not difficult to conclude for the rational mind that the boon he was carrying had no magical powers. He had been duped. Rédigé parYves states: Benegal doesn’t take advantage of the possibility of transgression of religious order which he had been loading the story with, for nothing happens between Parshuram and Parvati. In the same way, Bhai133

C O N T E S TAT I O N S W I T H I N D I A N M O D E R N I T Y

ravmurty (the zamindar) admits his guilt and his sins, but no sanction or punishment crashes down on him. So perhaps this disappointment in the unwinding of the story can be counted towards an appreciation of the film as a denunciation of superstition, as some people say, because a more symbolically charged, more eventful ending might have meant the film’s story was to be interpreted on the fictional level of religious symbols, and therefore within the sphere of faith.6 Benegal’s aesthetics in this film stand very close to what is called naturalism in cinema. Parshurama’s conflict is between his natural instincts and his social position, which are part of his physical and cultural inheritance. He, on the one hand, is the product of his biological forces; and on the other, social and cultural forces determine his destiny. Being a Brahmin, it became essential and convenient for him to win a position of respectability through religion. In the worldly sense, he has failed to prove himself for which he is often chided by his brother. In order to prove his worth in the eyes of his family and society, he finds refuge in religion. The boon given by Kondura is the manifestation of his latent desire to find a boon to earn a position in society. The film does not encourage any notion of religiosity either residing with the earlier priest or Parshurama. The filmmaker is critical of both. Parshurama is tormented by the biological world, instincts and social reality. As any typical naturalist narrative, at the end the protagonist of the film is shattered, broken and defeated. The camera work in the film also focuses on the portrayal of nature. Seascape, rocks at the shore, sea waves are not merely part of the backdrop; rather nature becomes a character in the film. In the opening scene of the film, while Parshurama is leaving the village, the camera shows Parshurama’s agitation in his fast paces. It also highlights the patterns of rugged rocks and cliffs at the beach, and the waves hitting them. The god of the village is said to be living in the depths of the waves. The camera work in this scene gives the waves and rocks their own individual character. While Parshurama is going back to the village, the camera follows the same route Parshurama had taken earlier while running away from the village. The narrator gives equal space to Parshurama’s journey back home, and the lives of fishermen, highlighting their boats and the landscape. The position of the camera, its movement and its use of close-up shots to extreme long shots enhance the creative potentials of the medium. The ideas of scientific and rational thinking are embodied in the village school teacher, who is a marginal character in the narrative; but at the end, it is the teacher’s viewpoint that stands justified. In a nuanced and subtle manner, the film critiques superstitions, faith and religiosity. Benegal has succeeded in transforming the story into the medium of cinema with the stamp of the auteur on the film.

134

C O N T E S TAT I O N S W I T H I N D I A N M O D E R N I T Y

Aarohan (The Ascent 1983) Aarohan brought Shyam Benegal back to the subject of oppression and exploitation of the downtrodden in villages after having made films like Kalyug, Mandi set in cities and a big budget film like Junoon. Just as Ankur and Nishant were set against the backdrop of the Peasants’ Revolt in Andhra, Aarohan is rooted in the history of peasant repression and rebellion in West Bengal. The film was produced by the Government of West Bengal. The incident of Indra Lohar, the sharecropper, which was published in the Frontier, kindled Benegal’s interest in telling the story of the suffering and struggle of the poor through his medium. Buddhadev Bhattacharya, the State Minister of Information at the time, was interested in sharing Indra Lohar’s story with the world. The film tells the story of a poor farmer at the time of the Land Reforms in West Bengal in post-colonial times. Subsequent to the Land Reforms Act of 1955, which had failed to protect sharecroppers from unscrupulous landlords (zamindars), the Left Front, elected in 1978, introduced Operation Bargadari which was designed to give the tenants greater status. Educating sharecroppers (bargadars) and registering their names was the Left Front’s primary objective. But the secondary aim of the film’s production was to propagate the ideology of resistance against feudal practices. The use of cinema as a medium would help to increase awareness of the Left Front’s contribution to resolving the sharecroppers’ problems. The film tells the story of Hari Mondal (Om Puri) and his brother, Bolai (Noni Ganguly) who are bargadars or sharecroppers. They plough the land of the Jotdar or the landlord. Bibhutibhushan Ganguly (Victor Banerjee), after losing his father wishes to keep bargadars under his control. Hari Mondal and other poor farmers are enlightened by the schoolteacher about the land reforms, according to which they can become owners of the land they had been working on for years, for which they are required to register themselves with the government. The landlord does not want these farmers to register themselves, which brings farmers and the landlord into conflict with each other. The film shows Hari Mondal’s struggle in the wake of changing land rules; his legal battle to protect his rights and also his rise in power by contesting elections. Despite portraying Hari Mondal’s struggle, the film gives a depressing picture of the poor and their living conditions in the village as well as in the city. Although Benegal returns to the issue of oppression of the poor in this film, his style of filmmaking moves away from the classical realism he used in his first rural trilogy. By making Om Puri, one of the actors, speak directly to the audience about the film’s historical context and central theme, Benegal creates a film version of “the alienation effect”.7 Om Puri, before the film titles roll, introduces the audience to the history of the Land Reform; its failure in West Bengal; the main characters; the actors, the village where the

135

C O N T E S TAT I O N S W I T H I N D I A N M O D E R N I T Y

action takes place and the political requirement of peasants to unite against the Zamindari system. The opening scene shows a procession by angry farmers wearing red gamcha8 and shouting slogans about empowering bargadars. The newly appointed schoolteacher is teaching local farmers about their rights under the new law and encourages them to register their names. In another scene, the naxalites drag a zamindar out of his house at night and kill him pronouncing the verdict of the Jantana Adalat. The rising voice of protest becomes a cause of concern in the house of the local zamindars. The senior zamindar and his son are shown leaving their house as peasants are taking part in a demonstration in the street. While sitting in the car, the senior zamindar gasps for breath. He is helped out of the car by his servant but dies. His death symbolises the power of protest and the fear instilled in the zamindars and the death of the old order. How the new order or the next generation of zamindars negotiate the changing times becomes the crux of the film’s narrative. Hari Mondal (Om Puri) goes to Jotdar Bibhutibhushan Ganguly (Victor Banerjee) after the death of the senior zamindar. Hari Mondal needs money for his sister’s marriage and Bibhutibhushan makes Hari Mondal promise him that he would not register his name for Bargadari. The heat of protest has not affected Hari Mondal yet. In the village of Giripur, where he lives and the surrounding village, the Naxalite Movement is gathering momentum. Poor farmers are uniting against oppressive feudal lords and Jantana Adalat of the Naxalite is pronouncing judgments against the feudal lords. Amidst the politically charged atmosphere of the village, Hari Mondal decides to comply with his lord, the family they had served for generations. Unlike his brother, Hari Mondal shows no sign of political awareness. Hari Mondal becomes politically aware only after experiencing the breach of trust by Bibhutibhushan Ganguly. He realises how the subtle conspiracy of the feudal lord has transformed the status of bargadar for him and his brother to that of a simple labourer. Bibhutibhushan Ganguly makes the unquestioning Hari Mondal give his word that he would not register himself as bargadar. Against the wishes of his brother Bolai, who understands the feudal lord’s motive, trusts Bibhutibhushan Ganguly and does not register as bargadar, which was a requirement under Operation Bargadar. Hari Mondal’s gullible nature makes him vulnerable. Jotdar Bibhutibhushan assumes control of the land and the brothers are forces to work their own land for wages. Having realized his mistake and Jotdar’s intentions, he rises up. The piece of land, which constituted Jotdar’s social hierarchy, status and power, was the only source of emancipation for the poor bargadar, who had been working the piece of land for generations without ownership. Operation Bargadar gave all bargadars the opportunity to own the land. Both Jotdar and Bargadar fight over the same land for different reasons. Jotdar had resources, contacts and the influence to manipulate laws and legal procedures to their 136

C O N T E S TAT I O N S W I T H I N D I A N M O D E R N I T Y

advantage; whereas poor sharecroppers only had the weapon of their trade union and new laws. When Bolai is dismissed, he decides to go to Calcutta. Panchi (Sreela Majumdar), who loves Bolai, also wants to join him, but Bolai refuses to take her along. Bolai in Calcutta falls into the world of crime. Panchi’s mother is sent to Calcutta to work as a domestic help. Panchi is approached by a man, who has promised to find her work in Calcutta. He leaves Panchi in the house of a middle-aged man in Calcutta while the famous Hindi song from the film Brahmchari (1968) is played on the radio. She eventually becomes his mistress. His removal of Panchi’s sari from her shoulders is juxtaposed with the victory procession of the second United Front Government in 1969. Here onwards, the film tells two narratives simultaneously. One is Hari Mondal’s conflict with the Jotdar in the village and the other is the story of Bolai, Panchi and Panchi’s mother in Calcutta. The city is shown as a space of crime, unemployment and sexual exploitation; whereas the village continues to be a feudal space of exploitation of the poor in which Jotdar use their influence and power to manipulate authorities. Hari Mondal is approached by the schoolteacher (Pankaj Kapoor) and an activist lawyer, who promises to help Hari Mondal to register as a Bargadar and fight his legal battle against Jotdar to claim his land back. While Hari Mondal is filing his petition, Jotdar Bibhutibhushan reaches there. In the meantime, Vibhutibhushan gets Hari Mondal’s uses his bullies to acquire Hari Mondal’s thumb impression which acts as a signature on the petition to abandon his claim. The legal battle between Bibhutibhushan Jotdar and Bargadar Hari Mondal becomes ugly as Jotdar lodges a complaint of theft against Bargadar and gets him arrested. Hari Mondal loses the legal battle and is beaten by bullies and his hut is burnt. In the meantime, in Calcutta, Bolai is arrested by the police. Dhirej Babu, a politically influential man, gets him released on bail if he will work as a political bully. He grows stronger as he participates in various political clashes. Panchi accepts her status as a mistress. One day, with the help of the servant, Panchi goes to meet her mother. On the way back, she sees Bolai walking on the road. In the final stage of his legal battle, Hari Mondal is forced to offer an unqualified apology for contempt of court after which he is shown standing outside the Court of Law. The camera pans from the top of the court to Hari Mondal standing alone and looking diminished in front of the Court, a signifier of the state and its power. The shot suggests his defeat, vulnerability, frailty and disadvantaged status in his struggle for his rights against a system that favours the upper-caste and the rich. In the next shot, which is long for dramatic effect, he is shown limping alone in the countryside on his journey back home. The song played in the background is a deliberate commentary on the situation of the defeated Hari Mondal. The song – Dekho Hari Mondal Ko Dekho – acquires multiple meanings in this context. Hari Mondal’s struggle with the help of the schoolteacher continues. He stands in the election of Panchayat, the local 137

C O N T E S TAT I O N S W I T H I N D I A N M O D E R N I T Y

governing body of the village and wins. He also succeeds in getting his certificate of Bargadari. He goes to Calcutta in search of Bolai without knowing that he has been sentenced to life imprisonment; Panchi has gone mad after being abandoned by the man whose mistress she had become and Panchi’s mother has died. Hari Mondal returns to his village without finding Bolai. The song in the background echoes the idea of revolution. The voiceover states that the film has played out over a twelve-year period. The arduous struggle had taken its toll on Hari Mondal and he dies in 1980. Though Sangeeta Datta opines that the “script sacrifices the subtleties of characterization for the portrayal of an historical class struggle” (Datta 2008: 167), Hari Mondal in the narrative is not a “flat character”, a term coined by E.M. Forster. He constantly grows reflecting the symbolic importance of the film’s title. From showing very little political awareness and being completely submissive before the authority of the Jotdar, he fights a long battle for his rights. The first sign of growth is when he is shocked to discover how the Jotdar has thrown his brother out of his land as a redundant labourer. With the help of the schoolteacher/activist lawyer, he fights his legal battle against the system in the district Court. After losing the legal battle, losing his hut and braving the physical injuries inflicted by the bullies, he begins another battle once again, motivated by the schoolteacher. In the meantime, he joins the armed struggle, but on witnessing the violence and the deaths of his comrades, he reflects on the necessity of the use of violence in the struggle. Finally, he agrees to stand in the election. He wins the election of the Panchayat and gets the certificate of Bargardar, which he had been fighting for in the court. He grows in confidence. He sees in the eyes of Jotdar Bibhutibhushan Ganguly and says that the only redeeming quality of the poor farmer in the existing system is their unity. His growth in stature is signified towards the end of the film when Bibhutibhushan Ganguly stops his car to have a word with him and asks Hari Mondal to consider him as one of his own people. In the portrayal of his character, ascendance from a weak, poor, oppressed farmer to the status of fighter and eventually, leader can be seen. While Hari Mondal’s status is elevated, other characters are much diminished. His brother becomes a criminal and is sent to jail; Panchi becomes a mistress and then a mad woman in the streets and Panchi’s mother dies as a domestic help. The filmmaker has not shown faith in armed struggle or radical ways of social change; rather, he suggests that it is within the democratic frame that the downtrodden and subaltern like Hari Mondal are able to create some space for themselves. Based on the true story of Indra Lohar, the film is the narrative of struggle, resilience and grit, shown by Hari Mondal in the film against the historical backdrop of class struggle in West Bengal. The narrative does not portray a romanticised image of revolution. Most of the narrative deals with the difficulties and challenges faced by the poor sharecroppers or bargadars in West Bengal in their battle against the strong Zamindari system, which continues 138

C O N T E S TAT I O N S W I T H I N D I A N M O D E R N I T Y

to exercise its influence and power. The Jotdars, both in the film and in reality, use their influence in bureaucracy and the judiciary to tilt the balance of justice in their favour. As Ashok Mitra says: Whatever legislation you pass, you can never circumvent the combined attitudinal bias of the bureaucracy and the judiciary. It may be rendering homage to cliché to talk all the time of inherent deficiencies of the system, but can one deny the burden of entire civil and criminal laws, judicial pronouncements and precedents, administrative tradition and practices is heavily loaded in the favour of the privileged groups? (28) Hari Mondal’s struggle exemplifies the struggle of the “have-nots” in a system favouring the “haves”. The film is a saga of the heroic struggle of Hari Mondal against powers that were too strong for him to fight alone. The system works in a manner in which different institutions (judicial, administrative, bureaucratic) come together to help the upper-class and high-caste members of society. The subaltern of society is denied its right in a systematic manner. The film highlights the failure of the Indian system in giving the ordinary people their rights, a challenge before India as a nation-state in modern times. Hari Mondal’s is the narrative of determination and courage to stand against oppression, the nexus between the feudal centre of power and various institutions of the modern (nation-)state and trials of life. In the largely depressing narrative, the ray of hope is given by Hari Mondal’s success at the end. Produced by the Government of West Bengal, while telling the story of struggle, protest and success, the film also becomes the mouth-piece of the then Left Front Government to spread the ideology of protest and struggle against the oppressive feudal practices in free India beyond West Bengal. The narrative of the film is also punctuated with references to the political contest with the victory of the United Front in the 1960s, and the Left Front in the 1970s in West Bengal. Hari Mondal’s success through the parliamentary mode of struggle also suggests the necessity of change within the democratic form of government. The inherent ideology of the film does not propagate an extreme radical way of overhauling the system, but to fight for the rights of the downtrodden within the frame democracy.

Susman (The Essence 1987) In India, Kabir’s famous song Jhheeni Jheeni Bheeni Chadariya echoes like an anthem. Kabir, a famous Bhakti poet, was a weaver by profession, which also gives him a caste considered lower in the social order. Weavers, or Julaha as they are called in Hindustani, belong to socially and economically 139

C O N T E S TAT I O N S W I T H I N D I A N M O D E R N I T Y

backward section of India society. Kabir’s poetry has been used in the film, and “weaving” is the fulcrum of interpretation of the film. The traditional handloom weavers make sarees, which constitute an important fabric of Indian culture. Almost every region of India has its own signature fabric, design and style of wearing Sarees, which has given Sarees their distinct identity. In most cases, Sarees are known by the places where they are made. Banarasi Saree is made in Banaras or Varanasi, a town in Uttarp Pradesh (U.P.); Chanderi Saree is made in Chander, a town in Madhya Pradesh; Sambalpuri Saree is made in Sambalpur, Odisha; Kasta or Nauvari is native to Maharasthra; Patola Sarees are made in Patan, Gujarat; Kanjiveeram Sarees are made in Kanchipuram, Tamil Nadu; Paithani Saree is made in Paithan near Aurangabad, Maharastra; Badhini Sarees belong to Gujarat; Lehriya Sarees belong to Rajasthan; Muga Sarees are made in Assam; Jamdani, Tant and Baluchari belong to Bengal and Kasavu Sarees belong to Kerala. From the songs of Kabir to the place where they are made, Sarees have become the metaphor of the cultural matrix of India. Like linguistic, religious and cultural diversity in India, there is a vast and fascinating spectrum of diversity in sarees in India. Handloom weavers have been a significant section of the Indian cottage industry. Susman tells the story of traditional handloom weavers on the verge of extinction in the wake of rising industrialisation and commercialisation. If the former threatens the existence of traditional handloom weavers, the latter exploits their labour for profit. The film was financed by the Association of Co-operatives and Apex Societies of Handloom. The film was written by Shama Zaidi and the music by Vanraj Bhatia, but for the song of Kabir which was sung by renowned classical vocalist Pt. Jasraj. The film is set in Pochampalli, a small village near Hyderabad. The cluster of villages of weavers was registered on the map because of its weavers. The Pochampalli weave is known for its dye and tie technique known as “Ikat”. The Ikat style of weaving is more than 200 years old. It is known for its intricate design and style using the finest silk and cotton thread. The film begins with a montage introducing different sarees of India such as Tanjeri, Banarsi, Tanchoi, Jaamdani, Kanchipuram, Ventakgiri saree with Kalakari print, Patola saree. Mandira Rai’s (Neena Gupta) voiceover is appreciating their beauty, colour and design, but also lamenting constantly the depleting number of kaarigars9 of this craft. The opening scene establishes the socio-economic context in which traditional kaarigars are pitched against the booming fashion industry and industrialisation of modern India which threaten the art and existence of traditional handloom workers. Mandira Rai is a connoisseur of sarees and arranges fashion shows of ethnic sarees in India and abroad. She is collecting sarees from all parts of India for an exhibition to be held in Paris, for which she is supervising the rehearsal of her models. Mandira Rai goes to the village with Narasimah (Kukbhushan Kharbanda) to see the work of local weavers. 140

C O N T E S TAT I O N S W I T H I N D I A N M O D E R N I T Y

The main part of the narrative unfolds at Pochampalli, a village in Andhra Pradesh. The montage shows the narrow lanes of the village, Ramulu (Om Puri) is on a cart and festivities are being held in the village. Ramulu offers a saree woven by him to the god. The practice in the village is that the saree of the best weaver is offered to Markandeya,10 a sage who is now being worshipped as a god. The dynamics of village life are complex: the economic problems of the workers, fear of extinction at the hands of power looms in the textile mills, corruption in the co-operative society, migration of younger workers to the cities and moral degradation intersect. Ramulu has a daughter who is to be married. Her fiancé, who works in Bombay, wants to postpone the wedding because he does not have a Kholi (one-room house, henceforth, house) in Bombay. When he is pressurised to marry, he asks for a dowry from Ramulu so as to help him buy a house in Bombay. Ramulu’s wife, Gouramma (Shabana Azmi) pressurises Ramulu to collect a dowry for their daughter’s wedding. Ramulu, in spite of challenging socio-economic conditions, keeps himself morally upright. The villagers have started a co-operative society to safeguard the interest of the weavers, but the purpose of the co-operative is defeated by corrupt practices of the members of society who give favours to private agents by illegally selling them the raw material. The economic struggle of these weavers is connected with the larger national economic context. Economic policies in India, industrialisation and international fashion festivals exhibiting Indian handicraft put extra demands on producers of these crafts in India. It was impossible for the workers to meet the demands of the fashion industry. In such a context, Ramulu’s narrative attains allegorical dimensions. He represents economic hardships and the threat of extinction at the hands of industrialisation. He lives with his wife and daughter. In addition, he also supports his younger brother who constantly fights his wife. Amidst the clamour and commotion of husband-wife quarrels, Narasimha shows the delicacy and beauty of Ramulu’s craft to Mandira. Mandira asks Ramulu to prepare sarees for her exhibition. Without having asked for an advance, which his conscience will not permit him to do, he begins his work. He feels trapped and confined to the world of the handloom from where he can see no opportunity to improve his situation. The camera is placed to show Ramulu sitting behind the loom and the head-roller of the loom appears to cut Ramulu’s body in two through the middle. Ramulu is shown trapped behind the wooden frame of the handloom. He wishes to throw away the loom, but his wife reminds him of the money required for their daughter’s marriage. Conceding defeat, he takes to his work again. Kabir’s bhajan, Jheen Jheeni Beeni Chadariya sung by Pandit Jasraj adds multiple layers to the narrative. Kabir has used weaving as a metaphor to reflect on human existence at a physical and spiritual level. Kabir marvels at the masterly work of the master weaver. The song in the narrative resonates 141

C O N T E S TAT I O N S W I T H I N D I A N M O D E R N I T Y

with the pain and helplessness of Ramulu, who has no other option but to work. The visual shows coloured thread hanging by the loom and Ramulu, the weaver, begins to weave. The very act of weaving reflects Ramulu’s existential angst, economic circumstances and helplessness. Kabir wonders which thread god chose to weave this fine existence and the narrator11 wonders which thread has woven Ramulu’s fate. In the context of the narrative, the song echoes with the pain of a poor weaver in the wake of challenges posed to him by modernity. Human beings, whose existence is woven by the master craftsman with delicacy and perfection, suffers in a world controlled by the design of market forces. The irony lies in the very act of weaving as Ramulu, the master craftsman of the village, weaves beautiful motifs and colours keeping his personal tragedy aside. Benegal, the master craftsman of film narratives, weaves a scene to show Ramulu’s anguish and struggle. The camera shows Ramulu working at the handloom. Close-ups show his dexterous movements of hands and the beautiful threads around the loom.12 Through the montage of the handloom, its rhythmic movement and the song, Benegal has created poetry in which the sound and visual work together to enhance the meaning of the film. Camera angles, use of light, close-ups and zoom-outs all work together in unison with poetry and music in the song, making the Image-Sound montage produce highly evocative cinema. The imagery of the song is subtle, nuanced and redolent, but not loud. Towards the end of the song, the camera gradually pans back changing a close-up shot into a long shot showing Ramulu at work, his weaving is highlighted in the foreground of the image, invoking the iconography of Kabir, the acclaimed poet and weaver, in this song. Despite this sympathetic portrayal of Ramulu’s character, Benegal does not romanticise him. Soon Ramulu confronts a moral dilemma when his wife coerces him to keep some thread aside to weave a saree for their daughter. Ramulu’s moral integrity does not permit him to steal the thread, but he succumbs to his wife’s constant pressurising and his circumstances. His silence, when he is chided by Narasimha, reveals the sense of shame that torments him. It is not the silence of confession but of embarrassment, which results into distancing between husband and wife for some time. Gauramma tries to break the wall of silence between them and asks him rhetorically how much he has saved for their daughter’s marriage. Drunk and frustrated Ramulu gets up and tries to set alight the handloom. He is frustrated and beaten by his circumstances. The exasperated weaver wonders “Kaun taar se bini chadriya” (Of which thread is woven this existence of ours). He can find no relief from the handloom or hard economic circumstances which bind him. As a result, he does not want his son to take up his traditional profession. There seems to be no respite for the poor weavers whose existence is constantly threatened by industrialisation. Nevertheless, there seems to be no other option for them but to return to their handlooms. While Ramulu is working at his handloom, a song – Main Julaha – provides the setting to 142

C O N T E S TAT I O N S W I T H I N D I A N M O D E R N I T Y

express his angst and his desire to assert the weaver’s identity in the face of adversity. The plight of the poor weavers is shown by a marginal, but an important character, Gundayya (Pankar Kapoor). He is homeless and is aware that his wife prostitutes herself in the city, yet he is reconciled to his fate for he feels there are no opportunities available to him. The pain of all poor weavers is sung by Ramulu’s younger brother’s wife, Janki (Ila Arun). There are other challenges that weavers face in the wake of modernity. There are economic hardships, a weak infrastructure to support them, depleting moral fabric and conflicts between trade unions and mill owners. The 1980s is the decade which changed the nature of the textile industry in India. When India achieved independence, India was among the leading textile producers in the world, but its textile growth and production then began to recede. By the 1980s, India’s textile production was characterised by “poor capability and quality by global standards” (Roy 1998: 2173). The ripples of the unrest in the cotton textile industry could be seen in other textile industries, including the sarees industry.13 The economic and political strife of the 1980s is reflected in the film. The threat to existence of the handloom is juxtaposed with the inhumane living conditions of the city workers. Chinnu (Pallavi Joshi), Ramulu’s daughter, once married, goes to Bombay to stay with her husband. They share their room with others. They create their exclusive space within the same room by cordoning off a corner with the help of a curtain. Her living conditions in the room are in stark contrast to her small but open house in the village. Working conditions are tough in the factory. Forced by economic hardships, women slip into prostitution. The conditions of workers become difficult when trade union leaders strike. The protest of the factory workers becomes violent and Chinnu’s husband is beaten. Back in the village, Ramulu’s younger brother can see through the deceitful ways of Narasimha, who is also their uncle. He leaves the house after an argument with Ramulu. Disturbed and heartbroken, Ramulu stops working. However, his wife and his younger brother’s wife continue to work. When his brother comes back, he has established himself as an agent in Hyderabad. Despite personal differences with Ramulu, and constant demands by Narasimha for more money, Mandira Rai is able to get her orders on time. To everybody’s surprise and Narasimha’s disappointment, she decides to take Ramulu to Paris along with her for the show. Ramulu is shown walking in Paris with Mandira Rai in his traditional attire. After having tasted fame and glory in Paris, he comes back to his home and the handloom, the space which gives him his identity. In the last shot, he is again shown working at his handloom with no significant material change in his condition or circumstances. The film narrates the challenges posed to weavers and traditional craft by modernity at multiple levels. Industrialisation and modernity are threatening the existence of weavers and their traditional craft. Corruption in 143

C O N T E S TAT I O N S W I T H I N D I A N M O D E R N I T Y

the co-operatives presents a depressing view of the reality in which corrupt members defeat the very purpose of the co-operative. Ramulu, who is reminiscent of Kabir – the archetype of weavers, high moral integrity and spirituality – faces economic hardships, moral dilemmas and exploitation in the hands of capitalist forces. His character exemplifies how the integrity of a poor man is depleted by circumstances beyond his control. He also exemplifies resilience against moral corruptions caused by the invasion of modernity. He does slip once and becomes an accomplice to his wife’s designs of stealing thread to weave a saree for their daughter, but his fall is not permanent. He regains his lost integrity and suffers from a strong sense of guilt as well. His character reveals the difficulties faced by a poor weaver (or man) to practise honesty and high morality in the wake of modernity. The film shows intersections between the urban and the rural. Manidra Rai is an urban woman who has international reach and is interested in preserving the old handicraft of India. Her boyfriend, Seth (Jayant Kripalani), however, has a different view. He sounds like one who has no hope or passion for the old craft. He represents the voice of industrialisation and capitalism. He opines that what weavers do with hands can be produced with perfection in factories with computer-controlled machines. As in other films of Benegal, both of these characters go to the village from the city carrying their respective, but contradictory viewpoints. Mandira Rai seems to have an appreciation for the work done by weavers, which she wishes to preserve. She is willing to accept this work even with its imperfections. These sarees are important to her because they represent an old tradition of India. The irony lies in the fact that the benefactor of this art form and traditional weavers is also a part of the capitalist designs of the fashion industry which commodifies the labour of the weavers. Their sarees become part of the exhibition at Paris. Mandira and Ramulu are appreciated as well, but this does not bring any structural change to ensure better living conditions forweavers like Ramulu. Despite her appreciation for the work of weavers, Mandira becomes an instrument of consumption of the traditional art form in the consumerist industry. The narrative of the film is also woven like a saree.14 In the warp and woof of the narrative lies their traditional craft, existential angst of weavers, their struggle for the survival and struggle to uphold moral values pitched against the forces of modernity, capitalism, and industrialisation. The narrative captures the unflinching commitment of weavers like Ramulu to weave and not to yield in the wake of testing circumstances caused by industrialisation and the growth of the international fashion industry. However, there is a shift in Benegal’s artistic vision which shows his awareness of changing social reality. In the early stage of his career, Manthan gives hope of emancipation of the downtrodden through co-operatives; in this film, Benegal shows his cynicism with the idea of empowering the peasantry or weavers through co-operatives. Despite various state-funded programmes, the benefits of the 144

C O N T E S TAT I O N S W I T H I N D I A N M O D E R N I T Y

welfare policies failed to reach the poor. As a realist, he is not blind to what was happening in the society and conveys his critical understanding of reality in the film.

Antarnad (The Inner Voice 1991) Antarnaad, made in 1991, is directly based on the Swadhyay Movement, a socio-religious movement started by Pandurang Shastri Athavale in the 1950s. Based on the teaching of the Bhagwat Gita, the concept of the movement was to bring about social change through upliftment of the downtrodden and other sections of society. A Sanskrit word, Swadhyay means the study of the self or self-study. More than what the name of the movement indicates, it was a movement of self-transformation and self-empowerment. The central idea of the movement was to make people believe in self-dignity, self-esteem and self-confidence. Certain tenets of the movement can be seen as a continuation of the philosophy of Bhakti or devotion in modern times. The philosophy of Swadhyay believed in debunking superstitions, dogmatic religious beliefs and also increasing awareness against casteism. Glorifying the Karma and labour, the movement redefined bhakti not in relation to religious rituals, but as karma performed by its members. The members of the movement practised Trikal Sandhya, Bhakti Pheri, Teerth Yatra and Yogeshwar Krishi. Matsyagandha was an initiative taken by the movement which brought socio-economic changes in the fishing community along the western coast and Vrkshmandir (Tree Temples) was an environmentalist initiative of the movement. The members of the movement also practised community labour and the wealth generated out of this labour was spent on the downtrodden members. By the 1990s, more than 15,000 villages and five million people were associated with the movement. Pandurang Shastri Athavale, or also known as Dada ji, was awarded the Templeton Prize in 1997, Magsaysay Award and Padma Vibhushan in 1999. When the movement was at its peak, “Shyam Benegal, along with his writer Shama Zaidi, spent many months in the villages on the Gujarat Coastline” (Datta 2008: 168). The script was finally written by Shama Zaidi and Sunil Shanbag. Benegal’s research, interviews of people and what he saw became the subject matter of the film. Benegal has given the true history of people on the margins of society and their upliftment a narrative form in his film with the help of local people and professional actors. The film tells stories of initiative taken by members of Swadhyay Parivar in two villages, Neemda and Kanakvada. It is a narrative of transformation at multiple levels. Arvind (Kulbhushan Kharbanda), a lawyer by profession, is an urban member of the movement. His wife, Ragini (Shabana Azmi), works for women in the city. She is constantly harassed by Arvind’s mother (Dina Pathak). The opening scene of the film signifies tension in the personal lives of Arvind, his mother and his wife. Arvind’s mother is extremely critical of Ragini’s 145

C O N T E S TAT I O N S W I T H I N D I A N M O D E R N I T Y

working with the Mahila Kendra (women’s centre). Arvind goes to Neemda, a village of bandits and Kanakveda, the village of a fishing community, as part of bhakti pheri (procession of people singing devotional songs). Neemda is notorious for bandits and their terror in surrounding villages. Almost a century ago, as Arvind shares with his wife, the King of Bheelpur exiled a few of his soldiers, who started living in this place. Since then, their livelihood was based on looting people. His voiceover takes the narrative to Neemda where the bandits are planning to attack a wedding party at night. A group of men with their weapons are ready for the attack. The local priest, who is also an astrologer, predicts an auspicious time for the evening’s affairs. He depends on these bandits for his income as a priest as well as an astrologer. During the evening, they attack a wedding in progress and later, a wedding procession. They are followed and Tilu gets killed. His wife (Joan David), who was always against Tilu’s joining them, is devastated by the tragedy and vows to take revenge. She holds Ranchod Singh responsible for her husband’s death. Adamant on taking revenge, she asserts herself by moving out and into a cowshed. In the meantime, Arvind and his two friends visit the village. Taking them as spies, Ranchod Singh loots them of whatever they have in their possession. Arvind and his friends decide to go to Kanakvada instead to spread the message of Swadhyay. At a fair, Ranchod Singh murders the soldier. The police come to their village and arrest all important men including Ranchod Singh. While they are being taken away by the police, Arvind and his friends again reach the village. Ranchod’s suspicions are strengthened that these men are spies of the police, which makes their work at Neemda difficult. Finally, it is decided that Ragini should accompany them to Neemda. Ragini is able to make friends with the priest’s and Tilu’s wife. Gradually, children and women of the village start learning Sanskrit salokas from them. Owing to Ragini’s constant talk with the women and her counselling, women in the village are able to grow in self-confidence. When most of the arrested men are released, but for Ranchod Singh, these women have summoned enough courage to question the ways of men in the village. Ragini takes Tilu’s wife to the jail so that she could apologise to Ranchod Singh for having harboured hatred against him. Making an apology was crucial for her complete transformation, selfknowledge and self-cleansing from within. Simultaneously in Kanakvada, Arvind along with his friends and later, his wife did find work eventually, despite resistance against them. The village of the fishing community was the site where the idea of Matsyagandha was practised. The self-esteem of the fishing community was raised by referring to Maharishi Vyas, who was a son of fisherwoman, and Maharishi Valmiki, who also belonged to the low-caste. Both these important sages in Hindu mythology were of low birth, but grew to the stature of Maharishi or Great Sage. One is the author of the Mahabharata and the other is the author of the Ramayana. The fishing community in the village also indulges in 146

C O N T E S TAT I O N S W I T H I N D I A N M O D E R N I T Y

criminal activities and illegal trade. Two men in the village are big obstacles in their path. Arjun (Om Puri), a fisherman by caste but an influential and wealthy man of the village, and his stooge, Shiva (Kishore Kadam). With the constant efforts of the members of Swadhyay Parivar, first Shiva undergoes a transformation and gives up drinking. Arvind has his opportunity of selfreflection and introspection when he is raided by the Excise Officer. He is able to get the officer transferred with the help of the politicians. He finds how the members of Swadhyay Parivar help each other without bragging about it, and how the village people, whom he has been looking down upon, approach him to stand in the elections for the position of the Sarpanch. His self-reflection brings him face to face with the ugliness within himself. He accepts that he has been denying his true identity of fisherman and considered himself head and shoulders above the rest of the fishermen in the village. He reconciles with his true identity and discovers his self-respect. While working with the people of these two villages, Arvind and Ragini also understand themselves and each other better. While working with Tilu’s wife, Ragini has her moment of self-reflection and self-realisation. Arvind also accepts that he has failed to realise the hidden potential of his wife in the work of Swadhyay Parivar and also accepts his mistake in handling the family situation. Petty issues between Ragini and Arvind are also settled. The process of self-transformation is an endless one. While working with the other, one understands oneself better, if one continues to be self-aware and self-critical. The film ends with a huge gathering of Swadhaya Parivar of Human Dignity Day (October 19, 1991) in which all participants of the Swadhyay Movement share their experiences and understanding of the principles of Swadhyaya including Ragini and Arjun. The film has not been appreciated for the artistic worth that Benegal’s cinema is known for. The linear narrative lacks artistic vision, complexity and the signature style of Benegal. Its importance lies in chronicling one chapter in the social history of India in post-colonial times. The film explains various tenets and concepts of the Swadhyay Movement, its philosophy and praxis. The film stands ambivalently between fiction and reality, which has also determined the aesthetics of this film in which the ideas and contribution of Swadhyay have taken primary position over the aesthetics of cinema.

Samar (Conflict, 1998) Based on a story in the book Unheard Voices: Stories of Forgotten Lives by Harsh Mander, the film discusses real incidents in the rural Madhya Pradesh. Harsh Mander worked in Madhya Pradesh and Chattisgarh for almost two decades. He is better known as a social activist working for the poor, underprivileged survivors of mass murders and constantly speaks for the Dalit. He has also authored books such as Partitions of the Heart: Unmaking of the Idea of India, Looking Away, Fatal Accidents of Birth: Stories of Suffering, 147

C O N T E S TAT I O N S W I T H I N D I A N M O D E R N I T Y

Oppression and Resistance and Fear and Forgiveness: The Aftermath of Massacre. The script of the film was written by Ashok Mishra and music was composed by Vanraj Bhatia. The film won the National Award for the best film and best screenplay. The film narrates the incidents of inhuman treatment, humiliation and injustice constantly met by a Dalit peasant. Sangeeta Dutta and Saibal Chatterjee15 in a review of the film published in The Outlook mention the hand pump incident at the heart of the conflict. Harsh Mander, however, in his book titled Unheard Voices: Stories of Forgotten Lives gives the story of Mohan under the title of The Obeisance in which in 1987 the superintendent of police of Rajnandgaon in Chattisgarh receives a wireless message that a Satnami dalit has entered a Hindu temple which escalates into a volatile situation as the upper-caste people would not like it. The social status of Satnamis is ambivalent in the Chattigaarh society. Under the influence of Guru Ghasidas,16 Satnamis formed a sect and claimed high social status, but traditionally they are placed at the bottom of society, states Harsh Mander in the book. When police reached the village and investigated the matter, a poor labourer namely Mohan comes forward. Touching the feet, a gesture signifying abject servitude, he offered an abject apology. He shared with the officers that his wife had become severely ill. At that point in time, he made a vow that if his wife recovered, he would go to the temple and offer a chola, a small item of clothing, at the Hanuman temple, which was more of an idol placed beneath a tree than a full structured temple. While he was performing the chola charao ceremony, he was spotted by the upper-caste boy, who gathered other people from his community. This episode results in a commotion in the village. Incidents of publicly humiliating a dalit farmer by urinating on him appear in the film as well. Benegal has adopted a self-reflexive narrative strategy to comment on the caste-based oppression and prejudice prevailing in India across different layers of society. There is a film within the main film as a filmmaker (Rajit Kapoor) goes to the village where the incident of Nathu Ahirwar has taken place to add realism to the film. However, there are two Nathus and two Dularis in the village. One Nathu and Dulari are part of the crew who are acting in the film. These roles are played by Kadam Kishore and Rajeshwari Sachdev respectively. The names of these actors are Kishore and Uma. Nathu and Dulari played by Rajpal Yadav and Seema Biswas represent the real-life Nathu and Dulari. Similarly, Murli (Ravi Jhankal) plays the role of the village headman in the film being made in the main film and Yashpal Sharma plays the role of real headman. Rajit Kapoor plays the role of the director. The film is set in Kull village in Central India. It begins with celebrations of the birth of a son in the family of the upper-caste. Folk singers are singing the story of the Princess of Chandrawal and Prithviraj. King Parmar Deo, a ruler of the Chandela dynasty, who ruled in Mahoba, saved his daughter Chandrawal from Prithviraj on the banks of a river. The same river is 148

C O N T E S TAT I O N S W I T H I N D I A N M O D E R N I T Y

now called Chandrawal in the Uttar Pradesh, India. The song gives the film a historical frame of honour and conflict in the region of Bundelkhand, which continues to feed the honour of the upper-caste in the region. It also establishes an ambivalent historical connection as Ahirwars in Bundelkhand region are considered as an ancient martial tribe. Ahirwars are descendants of warriors of Ahla and Udal of the Mahoba region, who had fought in the battle between Parmal or Parmar and Prithviraj. Folksingers in the film also mention their names while telling the story of Chandrawal in their song. The relationship between Ahirwars and the upper-caste in modern times can be understood in terms of contestations of identities between the ruling class and the scheduled tribes (S.T.) in modern times. Categorisation and classification of communities have complicated their position in society. Chauvinism of the upper-caste man marginalises even those communities which had played an important role in the history of the land and estranged them further. Benegal, by adding a folk song in the beginning of the film has added a historical signifier to understand the dynamics of the relationship between the upper-caste and Ahirwars, a low-caste, in modern times. While celebrations are going on, spatial segregation of the upper-caste and low-caste Ahirs into two separate groups signifies the caste dynamics in society. The film highlights the caste-based oppression and tensions between the upper-caste and Ahirwars of the village. The next scene takes the viewers to the house of Nathu whose wife is rolling bidis. The first note of caste-based discrimination is struck by an incident which blends the hatred of the low-caste with sickness and ailments. The stigma of being low-caste and the associations which come with it of sickness and pariahship, is humiliating for Nathu’s wife, Dulari (Rajeshwari Sachdev), because it is believed that she is suffering from leprosy, although, in reality she is only suffering from a trivial skin allergy. The contempt against the lowcaste is heightened by society’s contempt of leprosy. In the narrative, the disease becomes a metaphor to understand the prejudice and contempt of the upper-caste against the low-caste. Dulari, who is already marginalised on the basis of her caste and gender, is further marginalised on the basis of health and hygiene. In the conventional worldview, leprosy is considered the result of bad karmas in a previous life. Since ancient times in India, people suffering from leprosy have been excommunicated from mainstream society. They would be quarantined and housed outside the main walls of the city. Jesse T. Jacob and Carlo Franco-Paredes have studied the stigmatisation of leprosy from ancient times to colonial India and post-colonial India. The Government of India started the National Leprosy Control Programme in 1955. In 1984, with the availability of “curative multi-drug therapy, the government changed the name to National Leprosy Elimination Programme (N.L.E.P.), with a focus of treatment” (e113). Carol Vlassoff, Seemantinee Khot and Shoba Ray term the condition of women suffering from leprosy “double jeopardy”. The idea echoes in the film as well through the presence 149

C O N T E S TAT I O N S W I T H I N D I A N M O D E R N I T Y

of a doctor who asks if anyone in the village is suffering from fever or skin problems. Dulari’s husband, Nathu, goes to a temple to pray for his wife’s recovery. After Dulari’s recovery, when he revisits the temple, he is caught by the priest and publicly humiliated by the upper-caste headman of the village, the central issue is the incident of Nathu Ahirwari. In the meantime, the film has already shown tension brewing between the headman and dalit workers of the village. In consonance with the changing laws and increasing political consciousness among the Dalit, the latter have started demanding more wages for their labour. The headman in an order to crush their rising voice denies them work. He does not let them even cross his village in order to go to the next village in search of work; threatens them and asks different members of the village to not co-operate with them. Nathu starts working in a city nearby, where he is exploited by his employer to lodge a false complaint against another upper-caste man. Nathu is caught in the brawl between his employer, his rival and the police inquiry. Nathu’s employer shuts him in a room to avoid police investigation. Nathu manages to escape from there and reaches his village. The incident of Nathu entering the village triggers another incident of humiliation of the Dalit in the village. When Nathu and his friends go to file a complaint against the headman, his house is burnt by the headman’s bullies. Finally, the matter is brought to the notice of the district collector who holds an open meeting in the village in the presence of the police officer. The district collector orders the police to arrest the headman on charges of inhuman treatment and violence committed against the Dalit. Benegal does not limit the frame of his narrative to the village to reveal caste-based oppression in Indian society. The film also shows caste prejudices prevailing in the film crew. The man playing the role of the headman, Chamak Singh (Ravi Jhankal) constantly passes comments against the actor playing the role of Nathu (Kishore Kadam), who is a Dalit actor in the film being shot in the village. He is a fictive-real17 Dalit actor in the film. Through his reflections and dialogues with Uma (playing the role of Dulari in the film being shot), the point of view of a dalit actor is also added to the film. Benegal adds another dimension of how caste and class prejudices operate among actors in the film industry, which contributes to the self-reflexivity of the film. Chamak Singh and Nathu had an altercation on the set, which is seen by all the villagers gathered to see the film. The visit of the film crew to the house of the Inspector General (I.G.) (Sadashiv Amrapurkar) also reveals caste prejudices prevailing among the members of the film crew. The officer congratulates the director (Rajit Kapoor) for his understanding of the issue. At the dinner table, Ravi Jhankal (Chamak Singh in the film) voices his sentiments against the low-caste without realising the low-caste of the officer. The officer’s own caste is revealed when he tries to pacify his son. His son is crying because his classmates insulted him by referring to his low-caste identity in school. 150

C O N T E S TAT I O N S W I T H I N D I A N M O D E R N I T Y

Rajeshwari Sachdev, who is playing the role of Dulari, is shown to be relatively free of caste prejudices. She is sympathetic towards Kishore Kadam; understands his pain and counsels him as well. The caste dynamics in the village are no different from the caste dynamics among the city people acting in the film. The film tends to deconstruct the binary positions of regressive rural and liberal urban. In both spaces – rural and urban – women have been portrayed as more understanding and sensitive. Dulari in real life (Seema Biswas) and Dulari in the film (Rajeshwari Sachdev) both display agreeable dispositions and better understanding of caste prejudice than the men in their respective societies. In a very subtle manner, the film narrative establishes connections between patriarchy and the caste system. The narrative is punctuated with various moments to highlight how caste discrimination is deeply ingrained in the society. The upper-caste lord of the village has no scruples while afflicting inhuman treatment onto the Dalit to retain his hegemonic position. The film remains relevant even today as the question of the Dalit and castebased reservations continue to trouble India as a (nation)-state. The film is based on the writing of an ex-I.A.S. (Indian Administrative Services) officer. It narrates the real incidents that he witnessed during his posting in a village in Madhya Pradesh. Such narratives highlight realities of different Indias that exist in contemporary times. Indian society continues to be affected by caste-based and gender-based oppression while it is marching on the path of modernity. Real incidents like these pose a grave and pertinent question to the modernity of India and highlights its paradoxes and contradictions. While commenting on the book on which the film is based, Rajni Bakshi writes, These stories of forgotten lives are simultaneously hopeful and distressing. They are a tribute to individual courage and the humanist engagement of those who reach out to help. But the same stories are also a window to the alarming failure of the political and economic system to prevent or alleviate entirely avoidable human misery. These stories illustrate the vast varieties of creativity and valour in Indian society. And yet all this positive energy does not seem to prevent a wide variety of systemic failures.18 Based on a real incident, the film blurs boundaries between the real and the reel. The opening scene of the film, in which Dulari (Raejswari Sachdev) and Nathu (Kadam Kishore) are seen, is actually a scene from the film within the film. By deferring this information to the audience, Benegal minimises the gap between fiction and reality. Using the self-reflexive narrative method, it also comments on caste prejudices prevailing among the crew of the film as the actors are no exception to prevailing prejudices. The self-reflexive narrative structure of the film allows Benegal to look at cinema as a cultural institution, through the same critical lens. 151

C O N T E S TAT I O N S W I T H I N D I A N M O D E R N I T Y

The film also comments on the relation between art and reality; reality and fiction in narratives. While the film is shot in the village where the real incident took place, the real Nathu and the real Dulari are not the real Nathu and Dulari as generally happens in neorealism. The real Nathu and Dulari are also played by professional actors, Rajpal Yadav and Seema Biswas respectively. In the film within the film, the roles of Nathu and Dulari are played by Kishore Kadam and Rajeshwari Sachdev. The “real” in the film also is a part of the fictional world of the film. While the film within the film is trying to capture the image of the real for masses in cinema halls, the real becomes the image and the image becomes the real in this case. Kishor, who is a dalit actor and playing the role of Nathu in the film, is not happy with the filmmaker (Rajit Kapoor) as he feels that he has been taken in the film not because of talent but because of his dalit identity, which he feels undermines him as an actor. He raises a pertinent question, “Will I always portray dalit characters in my life, nothing else?” The real Nathu, who is constantly watching the film, objects to various scenes. According to him, the way things are being represented in the film did not happen in reality. His comments highlight the changes that take place during the dramatising of reality. By using interjections of the real Nathu, Benegal is also commenting on the nature of cinema that the masses identify with and the kind of cinema he, as a filmmaker, would like to create. The director (Rajit Kapoor) in the film is aware that the film he is making will win an award, but will not attract an audience. The tension between Kishore Kadam (playing Nathu) and Ravi Jhankal (playing Chamak Singh) on the set mount so much that the real and the professional spheres become confused. Nathu (Kishore Kadam) objects to the punishment scene in which Chamak Singh would be urinating on Nathu’s head. When Kishore Kadam refuses to enact the scene, the real Nathu (Rajpal Yadav) says to him, “Why do you mind enacting it. Moreover, the urine in the shooting is not going to be the real urine. What I had on my head was the real urine.” 19 When the filmmaker (Rajit Kapoor) shows Nathu running in the street and crying after being humiliated, the real Nathu (Rajpal Yadav) objects to it. His statement made at that point is poignant and crucial to understanding the anger of the Dalit in real life as well as on screen. He almost says that when you are humiliated beyond your endurance, you don’t cry; rather you become fearless. The film, as a result of this incident, suggests how the dramatisation of reality always end up bringing about certain changes. The film becomes a creative text in which theory and praxis of art meet. Reality in any art form is not mechanically represented, or reproduced; it is mediated through the artist’s sensibility, ideology and the medium of creative expression. Even in a hardcore pure realist narrative, it is the artist’s understanding of reality which is shown through a narrative – verbal or cinematic, which is important to remember in the debate of reality and representation even in realist art. There are multiple voices embodied in the narrative. It comments on the condition of the Dalit in India; shows caste prejudices prevailing even among 152

C O N T E S TAT I O N S W I T H I N D I A N M O D E R N I T Y

the film crew; raises the issue of using a real-life Dalit actor to add realism in the film and also throws light on the relationship between the masses’ attitude and the aesthetics of cinema in a society in which consumerism is on the rise. Made in 1998, this film makes severe comments on society and cinema as a cultural institution in the post-liberalisation India in which popular cinema has made deep inroads. People in remote areas know about celebrities like Madhuri Dixit. Even the rural people are not interested in stories in which their real lives is being shown. Real Chamak Singh and his wife’s sudden fondness for Uma (Rajeshwari Sachdev), because she has worked with Madhuri Dixit, reflects the attitude of masses, popularity and reach of popular cinema in Indian society. The director and actors in the film are aware that this kind of “sensible film” will not find any distributor, but can win accolades from critics and can be shown at film festivals. Benegal is commenting on the nature of Indian cinema as an institution at the level of production, distribution and reception in a world that is controlled by the principles of capitalism. The debate of cinema as an art form or cinema as entertainment and its economical angle affected the actual film as well. Benegal seemed to have made the prophetic statement in the film that nobody will see this film, but for a few critics. Samar actually “failed to receive distribution. A Delhi-based company picked it up after the National Awards, but subsequently let it lie unwatched in its cans” (Datta 2008: 176). The aesthetic shift in these films can be best understood keeping in mind the debate between Lukács and Brecht. Benegal moves way from a realistic mode of representation, which he showed in the films discussed in the first chapter. The films discussed in this chapter fall into the category of the “philosophical realism” of Brecht. Even if Benegal has adopted narrative techniques like selfreflexivity, the alienation effect in cinema and the broken chronology of time, his “historical thinking” in these films is self-evident. Realism in these films is not defined at the level of empirical realism or aesthetic realism. Realism in these films defamiliarises earlier notions of realism or classical realism. Films in this chapter touch realism by engaging with the socio-economic reality of poor farmers, weavers and the low-caste, and showing awareness of the historical context in the form of political and economic context in these films. Benegal has not made films only for commercial enterprise or to provide escape to his audience by catering to their latent fantasies. His films have constantly been engaging with the social reality of India. But as a filmmaker, he would always have wanted his film to be screened. After Samar, Benegal made Hari-Bhari in 2000, for which he was commissioned by the Ministry of Family Welfare, and in 2001 he produced Zubeidaa. In Zubeidaa, he had the star cast of Karishma Kapoor and Rekha, and music was composed by A.R. Rahman. Was it Benegal’s reaction to the treatment shown by distributors to Samar? Was he hitting back at the Indian audience with a star-cast film? Or was he reinventing the aesthetics of cinema in the changing sociological context? 153

C O N T E S TAT I O N S W I T H I N D I A N M O D E R N I T Y

The next chapter studies Hari-Bhari (2000), Welcome to Sajjanpur (2008) and Well Done Abba (2009) to discuss new sensibilities, changing aesthetics and changing social spaces in Benegal’s cinema in the era of liberalisation.

Notes 1 Professor Sumit Sarkar in his works has criticised Raja Ram Mohan Roy and Derozio. His argument is that their influence was confined only to the elites of the Bengali society. 2 David Arnold has argued the importance of Science in Nehru’s vision. For details, go to “Nehruvian Science and Postcolonial India” by David Arnold. 3 Ibid. 4 For details, Ravi Kalia’s article “Modernism, modernization, and post-colonial India: a reflective essay”. 5 The phrase has been borrowed from Dipankar Gupta’s book titled Mistaken Modernity: India Between Worlds. 6 For details, read Kondura, Religious power is stronger than man by Rédigé parYves. It is available at. www.letstalkaboutbollywood.com/article-kondurareligious-power-is-stronger-than-men-125530261.html. 7 The technique of the alienation effect was central to theatrical devices used by Brecht. 8 Gamcha is a traditional cotton towel used to wipe the body. 9 Craftsmen. 10 Markandeya is a sage or rishi, who was saved from the clutches of death by Lord Shiva as Markandeya was a worshipper of Shiva. There are two versions. According to one version, this episode took place on the banks of river Markanda near Kurukshetra. There is a temple of Shri Markandeshwar Mahadev Shiv temple in Shahbad Markanda, a small town on the banks of the river Markanda between Ambala and Kurushetra. According to the second version, this took place at Thirrukkadaiyur, Tamil Nadu. 11 The song is attributed to the narrator as Ramulu is not singing the song. 12 Om Puri learnt the art of weaving to act in this film. 13 There are many case studies of saree weavers in Bengal, Kerala, Tamil Nadu, Andhra Pradesh, Gujarat on the challenges before saree weavers in India. Most of the studies done in recent times focus on the effects of liberalisation on traditional saree weavers. This also includes a survey conducted by S. Niranjan, S. Vinayan for Dastkar, Andhra under the Planning Commission. The report was submitted in 2001. 14 During a personal conversation with Shyam Benegal, the filmmaker gave the author the metaphor of carpet weaving to speak about the relationship between artistic complexity and beauty with reference to films. 15 Saibal Chatterjee, “An Indian Samar.” The Outlook, August 23, 1999. www.out lookindia.com/magazine/story/an-indian-samar/207978. Accessed on March 29, 2019. 16 Guru Ghasidas was a spiritual leader of the nineteenth century who preached in Chattisgarh. After Guru Ghasidas, his son continued with the preaching. Guru Ghasidas is also credited with establishing the Satnami sect in the region. 17 Fictive-real life means the real life of the actor in the fictional narrative of the film. 18 RajniBakshi, “Working for Change.” The Hindu.Online published May 20, 2001. www.thehindu.com/2001/05/20/stories/1320017c.htm. Accessed on March 28, 2017. 19 Original translation.

154

6 CHANGING MOFUSSIL SPACES AND NEW (MIDDLE) CINEMA

In the post-liberalisation era, Shyam Benegal’s cinema underwent changes at two levels, one was by moving away from the political cinema of the 1970s whereby he explored the possibility of new (middle) cinema;1 and the other, in which he departed from the view of the rural and the urban, and explored emerging in-between mofussil spaces in the wake of the economic policies of liberalisation. Blurring the boundaries between parallel and commercial cinema, aesthetically, the new (middle) cinema can be placed in a category in-between the two extremes. The new (middle) cinema, while making films on social issues, has a wider audience reach as it attracts new rising middle class in the post-liberalisation India. Set in mofussil towns, Benegal exposes government policies in India; shows changing female sensibilities in the wake of modernity and the rise of consumerism. Hari-Bhari (2000) discusses issues pertaining to women’s fertility rights over three generations and the change in women’s attitude with each generation. Welcome to Sajjanpur (2008) and Well Done Abba (2009) are light-hearted comedies, a genre Benegal has not explored earlier in his entire oeuvre.2 Historically the term mofussil3 was used by the East India Company in the late eighteenth century to describe the area adjacent to the limits of the Presidency towns. Rooted in the register of the Mughal administration, the word in Urdu refers to spaces that divided urban or administrative headquarters from the hinterland. As these spaces would surround the colonial cities, mofussil spaces during the colonial period would divide or separate Presidency towns from the countryside. In independent India, mofussil towns emerged as semi-urban areas, which are neither villages, nor complete cities. After India adopted the economic policies of globalisation and liberalisation in the 1990s, the consequent changes have been felt in social spaces and in consumption habits. At the surface level, the presence of better infrastructure and new technologies signify the advent of modernity in these spaces; but at deeper levels, mofussil towns continue to exhibit the presence of traditional outlooks and conventional viewpoints. They are either like villages in the process of being taken over by expanding cities; or like small towns benefitting from the proximity of nearby cities without being able to grow 155

C H A N G I N G M O F U S S I L S PAC E S A N D N E W C I N E M A

into full-fledged cities in their own right. These paradoxical semi-urban, semi-rural spaces stand in-between the binary interpretation of villages and cities. Set in such spaces, films to be discussed in this chapter are an incisive discourse on fluid changes and displacements impacting the moral fabric of the society in transition under liberalisation. Benegal captures the ephemeral world of modernity not only in the characters of his narratives, but also in the spaces they inhabit. Mofussil towns become a metaphor for Benegal to comment on contestation and negotiation of these spaces with modernity. Going beyond the binary views of the urban and the rural as they are segregated and distinguished by values, lifestyle, and social and cultural practices, Benegal posits another possibility of the liminal or in-between spaces and spatial practices. Liminality stands for the midpoint of transition in which a subject “passes through a cultural realm that has few or none of the attributes of the past or coming state” (Turner 1969: 94). In the cultural space, liminal entities are “neither here nor there; they are betwixt and between the positions assigned” (Turner 1969: 95). Ana Luz opines, “Spatially speaking, the position in-between refers to the transitional state between two events and opposed spaces” (Luz 2006: 143), which comes into being during the process of change or evolution from one state to another which makes it more of a “trialectic conversation” (Luz 2006: 144) between the two extremes of the binary view. It is a possibility of a third space between the two. After India adopted the policy of liberalisation, the boundaries between the urban and the rural began to blur as mofussil towns began to emerge as dynamic social spaces. The economic policies of liberalisation and globalisation have also altered the contours of cities and villages. While discussing the urban crisis in the post-colonial context, Ravi Sundaram makes an important observation that “Urban life has imploded: the new expansion of the cities has made the classic urban management model irrelevant or simply inoperative. Endless proliferation marks the new post-colonial urban. Home, workshops, markets, hawkers, small factories, and small and large settlements of the working poor now spread all over the planned metropolis or in regions where it was impossible to do so” (Sundaram 2010: 243). What Sundaram states while discussing the urban crisis in post-colonial metropolises with reference to Delhi is equally helpful in understanding the nature of mofussil towns in post-liberalisation India. These new emerging semi-urban, semi-rural spaces signify the changing nature of mofussil towns. Under the influence of development and newly acquired wealth, urbanisation has taken place at a very fast pace. Consequently, labourers march into these spaces from outside. They can be found standing by the roadside or on the street crossing, which gives the town a very chaotic appearance. Equally chaotic scenes can be found on the roads as scooters, motorbikes, rickshaws, pedestrians, and sometimes even animals move together. Health and education facilities are either of basic or substandard quality. General hospitals, mostly government 156

C H A N G I N G M O F U S S I L S PAC E S A N D N E W C I N E M A

run, provide a poor standard of care, and private colleges also fail to live up to their urban counterparts.4 The denominators of modernity in mofussil towns are primarily consumption oriented. Alongside their embrace of some aspects of modernity, people continue to cherish their traditional outlook on life. The old and the new, the traditional and the modern, the scientific and the superstitious exist together. Benegal has set his latest films in such mofussil towns. These films and the spaces represented in the films can be seen in the liminal category. These films are neither typical art films,5 nor purely commercial ones; rather Benegal has made low-budget, light-hearted films that cater to a large audience and do well at the box office while commenting on serious social issues.

Hari-Bhari (2000) The Ministry of Family Welfare commissioned Shyam Benegal to make a film on the family planning programme. While examining the state agenda of social development and population control, Benegal produced a womenoriented narrative. The film looks at the violence committed towards women in a patriarchal society in which sons are preferred. From the point of view of women and gendered space, Benegal raises the question of women in Indian society through the story of five women from three generations in a family. The film was produced by N.F.D.C., the screenplay was written by Shama Zaidi and Priya Chandrasekar, and dialogues were written by Shama Zaidi. Music was composed by Vanraj Bhatia and cinematography was produced by Rajan Kothari. The film is set in the rural Uttar Pradesh, but the village in this film is different from the village in Ankur, Nishant and Manthan. The presence of pakka houses, new markets, changing lifestyles of the people and the presence of TV and stereo signify that the complexion of the village had changed by 2000. These minor changes in lifestyle and consumption habits cannot become the basis to state that the social order has also changed or villages have been modernised. Some people cherish a traditional outlook, while some represent the voice of change. The liminal spaces are marked by the presence of both while moving towards the new. Women continue to be victims of domestic violence. They live under the burden of producing a male heir to the family, failing which they lose their right to stay with their in-laws. In the patriarchal society, which puts the pressure of producing the male child, women have no rights over their bodies, nor over their sexuality. They do not enjoy fertility rights and even lack fundamental rights. As Benegal was commissioned to make this film, the tone of the film is didactic; yet Benegal has presented a story “in an entertaining format that the paying public would like to see” (Datta 2008: 178). There are five women  – Hasina (Surekha Sikri), Najma (Alka Srivastava), Afsana (Nandita Das), Ghazala (Shabana Azmi) and Salma (Rajeshwari Sachdev), belonging to 157

C H A N G I N G M O F U S S I L S PAC E S A N D N E W C I N E M A

three different generations in a family. The protagonist of the film is not one woman, rather it is “the woman” who suffers and struggles but also resists. Each woman has a story and her history, which intersect with the stories of other women in the family. The use of subtitle technique highlights whose story Benegal wants to tell in a particular episode and also breaks the illusion of realism. Behind the personal histories of these women lie the story of India which also evolves over the set period of time. The first important story is that of Ghazala (Shabana Azmi), who has a teenage daughter, Salma (Rajeshwari Sachdev). Ghazala crosses the market with her brother-in-law before she enters the house of her mother, Hasina (Surekha Sikri). Ghazala has been a victim of her husband’s violence because she has failed to give birth to a male child. Ghazala is given the required emotional support by her mother and brother. Ghazala’s sisters-in-law, Najma (Alka Srivastava) and Afsana (Nandita Das) are somewhat uncomfortable with Ghazala staying with them. Ghazala’s husband, Muneer (Srivallabh Vyas) has been disrespectful to Ghazala as he found her frigid and unresponsive. Ghazala is enlightened by the village clinic that infertility is not always a woman’s problem, it could also be attributed to the husband. When Ghazala shares this medical opinion with her husband, enraged by this challenge to his male ego, he turns Ghazala out of the house. He demands a colour TV from Ghazala’s brother for accepting her back. Ghazala offers to contribute to the household by sewing clothes. Hasina, understanding the importance of economic security for women, announces one day to keep some money aside for Ghazala in case her husband refuses to take her back. Ghazala represents those women who are the victims of male preference in the rural society of India. In the domestic space with a strong presence of women, the old and the new intersect. At Hasina’s house, Najma (Alka Srivastava) and Khaleel (Lalit Tiwari) enjoy a good balanced relationship as husband and wife. Khaleel is a farmer and economically stable. Najma’s health is gradually failing. She has had frequent pregnancies which have taken a toll on her health. After the death of her newborn, Najma is persuaded by Ghazala to undergo surgery to avoid future pregnancy, a decision with which Hasina and Afsana both disagree. Najma’s husband is, on the contrary, understanding and supports her decision. Afsana cannot reconcile with Najma’s decision which she considers to be a sin. She is shocked to hear that her husband even has a vasectomy. Afsana is more educated compared to other women in the house, but she cherishes conventional views on matters of female fertility, abortion and vasectomy. Owing to her devout religiosity, she considers man’s decision to terminate pregnancy as murder. Afsana embodies the paradox of education and a conservative outlook. When Afsana learns that her husband has had a vasectomy she once again has an outburst of rage. Shocked and angry, Afsana returns to her parents’ house, where she is contradicted by a

158

C H A N G I N G M O F U S S I L S PAC E S A N D N E W C I N E M A

lesser-educated working woman on such issues as pregnancy, abortion and sterilisation. Her husband, Khurshid, persuaded by his mother comes to take Afsana back. The moment is almost given a comic effect with the help of a song. Afsana’s husband, Khursheed (Rajit Kapur), who works in a nearby town, represents the connections between materially changing villages and the new opportunities found in towns. After Khurshid has gone to the town, he sends a buffalo to the house and a colour T.V. set for his wife. Afsana is delighted and takes the T.V. set to her bedroom. Hasina’s story adds a new dimension to the narrative. She was once betrothed to her cousin, but was forced to marry her brother-in-law, a man much older than her, after her sister’s death during childbirth. From this marriage, she had two children. Khaleel is her stepson, but is quite devoted to his stepmother. In a flashback, Hasina is seen leaving her home on a bullock cart with a child in her lap and her lover looking on. Salma, who prefers to stay with her mother after seeing her abusive father’s behaviour, represents the future generation. She aspires to getting an education. While Salma is staying with her mother, she shares with Ghazala that she has not menstruated for three months. Fearing that Salma is impregnated by her lover, Ghazala starts to beat her. Salma asserts that she did not have sex and cannot be pregnant. Najma takes Salma to a female gynaecologist who confirms that Salma is not pregnant, but anaemic. The family plans to marry off Salma. Salma has learnt the lesson from her mother’s suffering and does not want to repeat her mother’s story in her own life. Ghazala is faced with a dilemma because her proposed husband is in his forties. Najma tries to convince Ghazala that because of the absence of a dowry, it would be difficult to find a good match for Salma. When the mother falls ill, the doctor suspects cervical cancer, which is deemed likely because of her early and frequent pregnancies. Ghazala finds the answer to her dilemma. She decides to postpone Salma’s marriage plans and continue with her education. The morning sun shining through the window becomes the metaphor of a new beginning for Salma. Through the personal histories of these women, the past (Hasina), the present (Ghazala, Najma and Afsana) and the future (Salma) intersect with each other. There is no dominant protagonist in this film. The main characters are not even the five women; rather, through their stories, Benegal has told the story of the women of India. The narrative of the film is structured around the five women, each of whom represents the saga of woman’s condition in Indian society. There are different kinds of sensibilities conveyed in the film. Hasina represents those who have suffered but reconciled with their fate. Although Ghazala shows elements of modernity in her character, she is a victim of son preference in a patriarchal society. Najma and Afsana represent the complex shades of women. Najma, with Ghazala’s support, takes a progressive step of undergoing surgery to avoid pregnancy, but in Salma’s case, she proposes the highly regressive idea of marrying her to a

159

C H A N G I N G M O F U S S I L S PAC E S A N D N E W C I N E M A

middle-aged man. Afsana is the most paradoxical woman in the film. She is educated; she wants to enjoy personal space with her husband. She has a stereo and T.V. in her room, but on matters of pregnancy, she cherishes highly regressive and conservative ideas. Salma has seen her mother suffer and also her abusive father’s behaviour. She has taken the decision to change the course of her life and wants to acquire an education. In parallel, there are signifiers of the consumerist society in the film. But the social space is paradoxical and contrasts have been juxtaposed. There is for example, a colour T.V. and red stereo in the house along with a buffalo; Najma and Ghazala are open to the modern ideas of family planning, while Afsana in the same house is conservative. One brother is an affluent farmer, while the other has gone to the town to work. There are connections between the rural and the world outside. The space shown in the film is not rural in the traditional sense, nor is it a modern space. Women are neither thoroughly conservative, nor completely modern. There are constant negotiations between the two worlds in the liminal world shown in the film. As the film was shot with budgetary and time constraints, it fails to be classed as a work of art. Despite non-linear characters, the narrative runs in a linear fashion. The didactic message in the film has overpowered its aesthetics. Nevertheless, Benegal has moved away from formalistic realism while dealing with the issue of women’s empowerment and their fertility rights. It is a women-centric film. The issue has been narrated in a way in which a larger audience could identify with the polemics examined. Even while telling of the suffering and pain of women, the tone of the film is not tragic or elegiac. There are elements of comedy in the film, a genre which Benegal explore to the maximum in his next two films.

Welcome to Sajjanpur Welcome to Sajjanpur, as the narrator in the film says, is set in a “developed village.” The narrator notes that Sajjanpuris is quite close to Chitrakoot, a town in the Satna district, Madhya Pradhesh. The town is of religious and cultural importance as it is associated with the Hindu epic, Ramayana. The film is more a story of the village than the main character-narrator, Mahadev (ShreyasTalpade), who is a letter writer by profession and once wanted to be a novelist. Since most of the inhabitants of the village are illiterate, they come to Mahadev asking him to write letters to their family members. Consequently, the boundaries between personal and public space are nominal. The first turn in the narrative comes when Kamla (Amrita Rao), Mahadev’s childhood love, asks him to write a letter to her husband. Mahadev tries to win her sympathy, her confidence, and, eventually, her love. He deliberately misinforms her about her husband to keep them apart but towards the end of the film suffers from a guilty conscience. He mortgages his land and, without telling Kamla, goes to the city to help her husband. Along with Mahadev’s 160

C H A N G I N G M O F U S S I L S PAC E S A N D N E W C I N E M A

story, the stories of other village inhabitants run parallel to the main plot: such as Raj Kumar’s (Ravi Kishan) and Shobha Rani’s (Rajeshwari Sachdev) romance; the political conflict between Ram Singh (Yashpal Sharma) and Munnibai (Ravi Jhankal), a hijra;6 the relationship between Ramsakhi Pannawali (Ila Arun) and her daughter Vindhya (Divya Dutta); and the presence of snake charmers. Raj Kumar’s and Shobha Rani’s romance encapsulates the issue of widow remarriage; Ram Singh, the local politician represents the criminalisation of Indian politics and the narrative of Ramsakhi Pannawali and Vindhya reveal the conflict between superstition and modern rationality. The people of the village are afraid of Ram Singh and do not want to vote for him. Munnibai wins the election but is later murdered by Ram Singh’s bullies. Vindhya is shown to be a self-willed young woman whose mother is worried because she cannot find a suitable match for her daughter. Vindhya’s mother believes that in order to ward off evil outcomes shown in her astrological chart, she must be married once to a “Saturday-born-dog” (this element takes a dramatic turn and will be discussed later). The village in the film is not isolated, rather it is well connected to the city, the outside world. The village has ceased to be a traditional village and is set on the march towards modernity. Benegal has woven in the elements of modernity entering the rural spaces but with contradictions of modernity “in order to unravel the unpredictable, unstable, and often, outlandish process of vernacular modernization” (Sen 2011: 11). In the present context of globalisation, as opined by Meiken Umbach and Bernd Hüpppauf, the significance of vernacular modernism is best understood by “examining its role in those cultural fields that participate in the construction and performance of space” (2005: 8). In these films, the rural is no longer ideal and idyllic, rather it is full of contradictions. The ambivalence is aptly reflected through Vindhya, who, unlike traditional women, is shown as a self-willed and independent woman, yet she succumbs to her mother’s superstitious beliefs. On the one hand, Raj Kumar’s and Shobha Rani’s romance opens up the possibility of widow remarriage; on the other, snake charmers continue to practise their quackery in the village. Mahadev, the literate man in the village, is introduced to writing text messages on mobile phones by an illiterate man, who possesses a mobile phone but does not know how to write. Mahadev, the protagonist, also has a streak of moral corruption in his personality. Moral corruption has generally not been associated with the protagonist in Hindi cinema, especially if the film is given a rural setting. But Benegal successfully inverts the notions associated with rural spaces and the protagonist in Hindi cinema here.7 The microcosm of the village becomes the imagined space for the macrocosm, the nation. Changes and conflicts in the nation are suggested through various characters and incidents such as widow remarriage, criminalisation of politics, Mahadev’s writing of revolutionary plays (although Mahadev became anxious when he learnt that revolutionary writers and activists were being targeted by the police), and new 161

C H A N G I N G M O F U S S I L S PAC E S A N D N E W C I N E M A

female sensibilities in Vindhya. Benegal also explores an increasing political awareness among the inhabitants who, at the time of the elections, behaved like true politically aware citizens of a democracy. The citizens realised that voting for the wife of Ram Singh for the post of Sarpanch (the head of Gram Panchayat)8 would be a waste of their right to vote. The unchallenged authoritative position of Ram Singh is resisted by Munnibai, a hijra in the village. The political contest in the village disturbs the conventional understanding of sexualities structured on stereotypes of masculinity and femininity. The aggressive patriarch Ram Singh, who wants his wife to be a puppet head of the village assembly, in this case is challenged by a transgender member of the local community. The third space of sexuality disturbs the conventional order of sexuality structured on binaries. The song that Munnibai sings during the election campaign refers to the caste, gender, and religion-based politics and bureaucratic corruption in India. Munnibai ultimately wins the election, but is later murdered by Ram Singh’s goons. The participation of the members of the hijra community in the local politics is reminiscent of Shabnam Mausi Bano, a real-life transgender politician from the Sohagpur constituency in Madhya Pradesh from 1998–2003.9 The forces of change still have to negotiate the violence of regressive forces, which comes to fore in the tragic hanging of Ramkumar and Shobha Rani by some villagers who find widow remarriage unacceptable. Vindhya overcomes the dominance of her mother’s superstitious beliefs and runs away from the marriage ceremony, at which point she encounters Mahadev in the market. Mahadev proposes to marry her. He eventually wins her heart after writing her close to 40 letters. Towards the end of Welcome to Sajjanpur, Mahadev is able to publish his first novel based on the characters of Sajjanpur. While sitting with the publisher, he reveals that certain incidents reported in his novel are different from reality, for example, Munnibai was not murdered, but rather is now a successful politician. Benegal also reflects on how consumerism, following liberal economic policies, encroaches upon the domain of romance and fantasy to reduce it to mere desire. In this schema, human selves and material objects lose their complex identities to become mere objects of desire. Mahadev’s fantasy is punctuated with the markers of modernity, globalisation and consumerism. In a song sequence showing his longing for Kamla, Mahadev’s graduates from bicycle to scooter to motorcycle to sports car and finally to a glider, signifying the inroads consumerism has made in the consciousness of even small-town or semi-urban populations. Mahadev’s craving for material items such as motorbikes and sports cars eventually transforms his romance in a traditional rural setting to desire in a consumerist society. The popular denominators of modernity, as shown in the film, are not the new outlook, new ideas, or questioning spirit for social change, but their embrace of consumption. The narrative, while exploring new possibilities in social and political spheres, also exposes the contradictions in 162

C H A N G I N G M O F U S S I L S PAC E S A N D N E W C I N E M A

post-liberalisation India. The dynamics of modernisation and change seem to be extremely complex and even self-contradictory. In Welcome to Sajjanpur, modernity in the shape of mobile phones and scooters has reached the village, but education has not. It is only through the characters of Vindhya and Mahadev that an iota of social change is suggested. The film is a satire on the failure of the welfare state in the wake of liberalisation. The attack on the Nehruvian vision to modernise India is evident in the way Mahadev, acting as an intra-diegetic narrator, reveals that the original name of Sajjanpur (the land of good people) was Durjanpur (the land of bad people). The name of the village was changed when Pt. Nehru, the first Prime Minister of India, visited the village. His dislike for the original name triggered the change. Since then, this village has been declared a developed village in the government files. The village becomes the centre of democratic polity (Munnibai wins the elections against a high-caste feudal lord’s wife) and also exposes the nexus between present day politicians and the world of crime, which makes it a commentary on the prevailing political situation in India. Inhabitants of the semi-rural place use modern gadgets and are exposed to changing market trends, yet at the same time, illiteracy, the criminalisation of politics, and superstitions continue to prevail.

Well Done Abba (2009) The second film, Well Done Abba (2009) has been adapted from three short stories: “Narsaiyyan Ki Bavdi” by Jeelani Bano, “Phulwa Ka Pul” by Sanjeev and “Still Waters” by Jayant Kripalani. Well Done Abba is a wry critique of development, welfare policies, and bureaucracy. The film exposes the gaps between state welfare policies and their implementation at the grassroots level. The narrative revolves around Armaan Ali (Boman Irani) and his daughter Muskaan (Minisha Laamba). Armaan Ali wants to find his daughter a husband although she is still in school. In his mofussil town near Hyderabad, Armaan Ali decides to take unfair advantage of a welfare scheme for the people living below the poverty line who are able to receive grants to dig wells on their lands. Armaan Ali arranges a fake B.P.L. (Below Poverty Line) certificate to obtain the grant. In the corrupt system, he loses most of the money in bribes he has had to give to various officers. The bureaucratic rules demand that he must produce evidence that a well was sunk at the site; otherwise, legal action could be taken against him. At this critical moment, his daughter comes to his rescue and helps arrange a doctored photograph of him standing by the side of the well in front of their house. A couple of days before the final inspection, he lodges a complaint at the police station saying that his well has been stolen. To convince the police officer of the theft, he produces the same doctored photograph which convinces the officer. The film satirises and exposes corruption in the Indian system, from acquiring a fake B.P.L. certificate to giving a share of the grant to the bureaucrats, using the 163

C H A N G I N G M O F U S S I L S PAC E S A N D N E W C I N E M A

doctored “photographs” of the non-existent well, and finally, lodging a complaint with the police that the well has been stolen. As Sen explains, Well Done Abba is a satire on national progress and development. But here, it is the gargantuan apparatus of the welfare state that is the object of sustained lampooning. While many of the postcolonial welfare imperatives have come to be somewhat redundant in postliberalization India, the state continues to deploy these in fits and starts. It is this dissonance between the nation’s avowedly global ambitions and the undertow of half-heartedly articulated welfare rhetoric in the local realm that the film compellingly addresses. (2011: 17) The film, set in a mofussil town, in many ways shows the effects of liberalisation and globalisation on Indian society. Chitakpalli has grown from a village into a mofussil town, a new social space signifying the changing Indian society. Ina comical manner, the film makes a comment on India in the postliberalisation era. The consumption patterns shown in the film are not needbased, but founded on market-generated desire. The film shows the mofussil town as an emerging space of desire and consumption, aptly shown through the character of a bureaucratic officer named Vikas Jha (Ravi Kishan) who longs for his wife to have bigger breasts. In order to “consume her breasts,” he wants her to use creams to enlarge them intensify his pleasure. Even though he is not a central character in the narrative, he becomes the central metaphor for consumption in the post-liberalisation society. His narrative in the film becomes the allegory of consumption and desire, reflecting how even the human subject is constituted by market forces. Through Vikas Jha, who does not belong to the mofussil town, Benegal widens the canvas to suggest that the effect of globalisation and liberalisation has also spread to other remote parts of the country. In the mofussil town, as shown in these films, people are willing to fulfil their desires through artificial, unethical, and quick ways, either by hoodwinking(Armaan’s twin brother and his wife) or by misleading a woman one loves (Mahadev in Welcome to Sajjanpur) or by marrying daughters to rich sheikhs in the Gulf.10 The subject and object of desire in such a system are constructions such as the doctored photographs created with the help of technology, which is indicative of how desires are manufactured and circulated. Benegal is not only focusing on one side of liberalisation. As the new economy has transformed the old village into a mofussil town, new sensibilities have also emerged. Muskaan is no longer shown to be a traditional, timid and shy girl. As an assertive, young, educated woman, she provides emotional and moral support to her father. It is because of her confidence, awareness of her rights, and intelligence that she is able to save her father from the police. She makes her own choices in life by choosing Arif as her 164

C H A N G I N G M O F U S S I L S PAC E S A N D N E W C I N E M A

life partner, but not at the cost of her education. Benegal is not blind to the role of the individual’s morality in a post-liberalisation society. Muskaan’s decision to shape her relationship with Arif on certain principles, the use of poetry between the lovers, and Armaan’s protest to subvert the corrupt system all shine a ray of hope in changing times. Even while satirising media in a market-governed society and Indian bureaucracy, Benegal shows his optimism in the individual’s strength and morality. The ambivalent nature of the mofussil can best be understood keeping in mind the way rural and urban spaces have been typecast. In an Indian context, the roots of imagining villages and cities in different ways stem from the conflicting ideologies of Mahatma Gandhi and Nehru. Gandhi idealised villages while deriding cities and other denominators of modernity; whereas Nehru always looked at cities and villages through a historical lens.11 According to Gyan Prakash, the debate between developing modern cities and strengthening villages is largely rooted in the national discourse as debated between Gandhi and Nehru. The inherent conflict between cities and villages is a part of India’s collective political as well as popular consciousness. Nehru perceived cities as spaces of “planning and development” (Prakash 2002: 4). He believed in urbanisation, not taking “away the people from the villages to town” (Nehru, qtd. in Prakash 4). Henri Lefebvre, in his concept of “ruralized countryside,” talks about how the village is changed by the logic of urbanisation. In his words, “Urban life penetrates peasant life, dispossessing it of its traditional features” (Lefebvre, qtd. in Prasad 2010: 83).12 To Lefebvre, space is a social product, not a pre-existing category, and it is produced through human activity. “(Social) space is not a thing among things, nor a product among other products. [. . .] It is the outcome of a sequence and set of operations” (Lefebvre 1991: 73). He opines that “humans as social beings are said to produce their own life, their own consciousness, their own world” (Lefebvre 1991: 68). While understanding the dynamics of the production of space, Lefebvre discusses how social space is the result of past actions; but it is also the site where fresh actions take place, thus making the production of (social) space an incessant process. The (social) space becomes the site of contestations and negotiations. The production of space in Lefebvre’s argument is a linked triad: spatial practice (perceived space), representation of space (conceived space), and spaces of representation (lived space) (Soja 1996: 65). Modern spatial practices are driven by capitalism and its hegemonic power structures. The logic of modern capitalism in its constant search for markets and the accumulation of wealth leads to the annihilation of space. Here, spaces like mofussil assume primacy. These spaces are perceived to be full of market potential as the consumerist possibilities of the megalopolis cities seem to be on the brink of saturation.13 Hence, there is a search for new economic frontiers. The mofussil or small towns are perceived as “a potential new solid – the new concrete location of everyday life” by the capitalist forces, which is followed 165

C H A N G I N G M O F U S S I L S PAC E S A N D N E W C I N E M A

by their penetration into these territories (Luz 2006: 146). With the onset of new economic policies also emerges the third space, which the inhabitants of the old simultaneously contest and negotiate. There are local civic bodies like municipalities, Panchayats, and ration cards are given out as part of the creation, which can be seen as “dominating spaces of regulating discourses, representative of representations of power and ideology, of control and surveillance” (Soja 1996: 67). This is the second space. It is against these two spaces that one has to understand the third space, consisting of the dominated. Consciously or unconsciously, the third space is also emerging as the site of differences between individuals and groups, deliberately created by “the hegemonic power structures to ensure its continuing empowerment and authority” (Soja 1996: 67). Through this process the third space becomes an arena where acceptance and resistance from different sections are played out. Characters in both the films resist and negotiate with the new cultural identities given to them by the emerging order. Mofussil spaces or “small-scale places denoted as vernacular” by Umbach and Hüpppauf, become important to understand the “negotiations between, and the interdependence of, the regional and the global, concrete locality and border-devouring abstraction, that can generate a new and more complex narrative of the modern” (Umbach and Hüpppauf 2005: 4). These spaces have their own ambivalence and ambiguity where the shift to mass consumption entailed processes of real destruction and loss, there also emerged new modes of organizing vision and sensory perception, a new relationship with “things,” different forms of mimetic experience and expression, of affectivity, temporality, and reflexivity, a changing fabric of everyday life, sociability, and leisure. (Hansen 1999: 60) The mofussil has two choices: either to accept such imposed differences or to mobilise to resist and struggle to retain their distinction. The resistance in the mofussil is evident in its continual social pattern teeming with personal and familial ties, which the forces of modernisation are unable to sweep away. Along with resistance, in the mofussil spaces are also found negotiations with new identities and new practices. These spaces are neither completely spaces of resistance and protest, nor complete submission to the new order. David Bell and Mark Jayne see this as the anxiety of “upward mobility on the part of middling cities” (Bell and Jayne 2006: 1). While such cities are challenged by “staunch localism, conservatism, risk aversion, traditionalism and lack of ambition” (Bell and Jayne 2006: 2), there is a strong desire for upward movement, too. This is symptomatic of the ambivalent nature of small cities or mofussil towns with their desire to find a place among the big cities, along with their backward pull. The simultaneous presence 166

C H A N G I N G M O F U S S I L S PAC E S A N D N E W C I N E M A

of outward and inward movements (centripetal and centrifugal) provoke contestation and negotiation. “Set in semi-rural areas, both of these texts negotiate complicated terrains spatially as well as in ideological terms” (Sen 2011: 11). In Welcome to Sajjanpur, Benegal mocks the narrative of developmentalism and the political system of India, while Well Done Abba is a satire on the country’s bureaucratic system. These films are either set in mofussil towns or villages on the march of becoming mofussil towns. In these films, the impact of globalisation and liberalisation in Indian rural or semi-urban space can be vividly seen. Through the dialect, details of the place, and other visual signs, Benegal has made the location in both the films clear and specific. Welcome to Sajjanpur is set near the Satna district in Madhya Pradesh and Well Done Abba is set in a mofussil town near Hyderabad. By the time Benegal made Welcome to Sajjanpur and Well Done Abba, many changes had taken place in post-liberalisation Indian society. While looking at the changing cultural and sociological landscape of mofussil towns, Benegal also reflects on the changing matrix of Indian society. Sociologically, the mofussil town emerges as a liminal zone between rural and urban spaces. Urbanisation or the march of modernity in mofussil towns shown in the films is marked by the indices of liminality or in-betweenness, more than by other signifiers of modernity. Popular perception of modernity as understood by people in such spaces is associated with the use of the latest electronic gadgets, the replacement of conventional mail by the mobile phone, and perhaps a public cyber cafe. Such places eventually become highly ambivalent spaces showing the simultaneous presence of the old and the new. The city can be understood in two ways: on the one hand as the place of desire and fantasy that gives it “the pull factor”;14 and on the other through the logic of urbanisation, by which the city expands itself, goes beyond its territories, and transforms the countryside. The dialectic of city spaces can be seen in the simultaneous presence of centripetal and centrifugal forces. While showing the socio-spatial organisation of these spaces, Benegal brings to the surface the inherent tension and internal conflicts in the mofussil spaces. Welcome to Sajjanpur is a mixture of social change and crime in politics and Well Done Abba shows the mofussil as the space of bureaucratic corruption, consumption and the individual’s negotiation and assertions with the system. Benegal achieved the objective of not reinforcing the stereotypes of rural and urban through his realist aesthetics and by giving a nuanced representation of these spaces. In both Welcome to Sajjanpur and Well Done Abba from the outward condition of location, it can be said that the benefits of development and welfare policies have reached these spaces in post-liberalisation India; but the way these two places (or spaces) have been represented, Benegal seems to be critically reviewing and questioning the grand narrative of welfare policies and development in India. In spite of the march of Nehruvian policies and the effects of capitalism into 167

C H A N G I N G M O F U S S I L S PAC E S A N D N E W C I N E M A

small towns, these spaces cannot be equated with cities, which are known as spaces of technology and panoramic views, places of anxiety, fear, and also government bodies. Mofussil towns, rather, show the looming shadow of changing spaces taking place in the world outside. Dismantling earlier binary perspective of rural and urban spaces in Hindi cinema, Benegal also deconstructs the stereotypical binary views on Hindi cinema. The mofussil spaces in his films are liminal spaces with markers of both tradition and modernity, which Benegal explores through his in-between new (middle) cinema. The mofussil towns in these films are not merely settings, rather they are metaphorical spaces that break down classic binary perspectives while contextualizing the complexities of post-liberalisation India. In these films, Benegal has softened his style of storytelling, but not his commitment to cinema for social purpose. He has moved from the sharp, pungent, scathing realism of his earlier cinema to the comic mode in his latest films. Humour and satire in these films comment on the evils in postliberalisation society and its systems.15 Moreover, compared to when Benegal started his career in the 1970s, the socio-cultural-political landscape of India in the beginning of the twenty-first century is drastically changed. He is quite aware that it is no longer possible for him to make such dated political films. Benegal seems to be developing a new cultural discourse to explore the emerging socio-economic order, as he generates a space for his art in the context of liberalisation. While negotiating these new environs, Benegal reorients his art to critique government policies and the nature of modernity in mofussil towns. He has transformed his cinema (as a cultural and spatial practice) into a site of negotiation and contestation while working within the new socio-economic order. Benegal’s cinema achieves liminality by blurring the boundaries of art cinema and commercial cinema. While experimenting with form and style, Shyam Benegal has rediscovered his aesthetics and also reinvented cinematic space.

Notes 1 As discussed in the Introduction. 2 The author has published an article titled ‘Liminal Cultural and Cinematic Spaces in Shyam Benegal’s Welcome to Sajjanpur and Well Done Abba in The Journal of Popular Culture. This chapter uses the material published in the article. 3 Mofussil is Urdu and Arabic, which means “separate”, “detailed”, “particular” and hence, provincial. The country station and district, as contra-distinguished from “the Presidency”; or, relatively, the rural localities of a district. For details, see Yule and Burnell. 4 An article in the online edition of the Education Times reveals that a private college is being run from a makeshift building in Uttar Pradesh. For details, see Mahajan. 5 The kinds of films ShyamBenegal used to make when Indian New Wave was at its peak. The author here refers to other films like Ankur, Nishant, Manthan, Bhumika, which Benegal made during the 1970s.

168

C H A N G I N G M O F U S S I L S PAC E S A N D N E W C I N E M A

6 Hijra is Hindi for “eunuch,” and denotes a third gender category. 7 There are films in mainstream Hindi cinema in which the protagonist either has criminality or evil in his personality. But these dimensions were generally explored in the films set in cities. 8 Gram Panchayat is the unit of local governance, an administrative structure followed in India, Pakistan and Nepal. Panchayat is an assembly of five persons; hence the name, Panchayat. 9 Shabnam Mausi Bano was the first transgender politician in India. The hijra community received the right to vote in 1994. 10 The problem of bride-buying has already been handled in Indian cinema in Sagar Sarhadi’s Bazaar (1982). 11 This idea is rooted in Gyan Prakash’s understanding of conflict between Nehruvian and Gandhian vision about cities and villages of India. 12 This argument is from “Realism and Fantasy in the Representation of Metropolitan Life in Indian Cinema.” In City Flicks Indian Cinema and the Urban Experience. For details, refer to the bibliography. 13 Thomas J. Vicino, Bernadette Hanlon and John Rennie Short in the article titled “Megalopolis 50 Years On: The Transformation of City Region” studies the changing socio-spatial transformation of a city. 14 The idea and phrase have been borrowed from Harvey’s The Condition of Postmodernity. 15 He is not the first filmmaker in India to satirise the follies of the Indian political and social system through laughter; Kundan Shah’s JaaneBhi Do Yaaro (1984) is an outstanding satire of corruption in the Indian system.

169

BIBLIOGRAPHY

2007. “Subliminal Persuasion: An Interview with Shyam Benegal.” Metro Magazine. Vol. 152: 72–76. Online published on 2007. http://search.informit.com.au/ documentsummary: dn=80102208166264; res=IELAPA. Accessed on September 25, 2013. Abbas, Ghulam. “Aanadi.”www.urdustudies.com/pdf/18/24GAAnandi.pdf. Accessed on April 18, 2018. Adorno, Theodor. 1997. Aesthetic Theory. Edited by Gretel Adorno and Rolf Tiedemann. London and New York: Continuum. Aitken, Ian. 2001. European Film Theory and Cinema: A Critical Introduction. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press. ———. 2012. Lukácsian Film Theory and Cinema: A Study of Georg Lukács’ Writings on Film, 1913–71. Manchester: Manchester University Press. ———. 2017. The Major Realist Film Theorists. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press. Anderson, Benedict. 2006. Imagined Communities. London: Verso. Arnold, David. 1965. “Rebellious Hillmen: The Gudem-Rampa Risings 1839–1924.” In The Freedom Movement in Andhra Pradesh, Vol.3, 1921–31, edited by M. Venkataragaiya. www.sakti.in/PDF_Files/Rebellious%20Hillmen% 20Full.pdf ———. 2013. “Nehruvian Science and Postcolonial India.” The History of Science Society. Vol. 104, (2): 360–370. Bainbridge, Simon. 2007. “The Historical Context.” In Romanticism: An Oxford Guide, edited by Nicholas Roe. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 15–26. Bakshi, Rajni. 2001. “Working for Change.” The Hindu. Online published on May  20, 2001. www.thehindu.com/2001/05/20/stories/1320017c.htm. Accessed on March 28, 2017. Barta, Tony. 1998. “Screening the Past: History Since the Cinema.” In Screening the Past, edited by Tony Barta. London: Pragaer, 1–18. Barnouw, Erik and S. Krishnaswamy. Indian Film. OUP, 1980. Baxandall, Lee and Stefan Morawski. 1973. Marx &Engles on Literature & Art. St. Louis: Telos Press. Bazin, André. 1999a. “The Evolution of the Language of Cinema.” In Film Theory and Criticism: Introductory Readings, edited by Leo Braudy and Marshall Cohen. Oxford: Oxford University Press,43–56. ———.1999b. “The Ontology of the Photographic Image.” In Film Theory and Criticism: Introductory Readings, edited by Leo Braudy and Marshall Cohen. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 195–199.

170

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Bell, David and Mark Jayne, eds. 2006. Small Cities: Urban Experience Beyond the Metropolis. Oxon: Routledge. Béteille, André. 2006. Ideology and Social Sciences. Gurgaon: Penguin Books. ———. 2012. Caste, Class and Power: Changing Patterns of Stratification in a Tanjore Village. New Delhi: Oxford University Press. ———. 2017. Democracy and Its Institutions. New Delhi: Oxford University Press. Bhabha, Homi K. 2000a. “Dissemination: Time, Narrative, and the Margins of the Modern Nation.” In Nation and Narration, edited by Homi K. Bhabha. New York: Routledge, 265–290. ———, ed. 2000b. “Introduction: Narrating the Nation.” In Nation and Narration. edited by Homi K. Bhabha. New York: Routledge. Bharati, Dharamvir. 2016. Suraj Ka Saatvan Ghoda. New Delhi: Bharatiya Jnanpith. Bhaskar, Ira. 2013. “The Indian New Wave.” In Routledge Handbook of Indian Cinemas, edited by K. Moti Gukulsing, Wimal Dissanayake and Rohit K. Dasgupta. London: Routledge, 19–33. Bhaskar, Ira and Richard Allen. 2009. Islamicate Culture of Bombay Cinema. New Delhi: Tulika. Binford, Reym Mira. 1987. “The Two Cinemas of India.” In Film & Politics in the Third World, edited by John D. H. Downing. New York: Automedia. Bluestone, George. 1957. Novels into Films. Baltimore: University of California Press. Bond, Ruskin. 2007. A Flight of Pigeons. New Delhi: Penguin Books. Booth, Gregory D. 2007. “Making a Woman from a Tawaif: Courtesans as Heroes in Hindi Cinema.” New Zealand Journal of Asia Studies. Vol.9, (2): 1–26. Chakravarty, Sumita S. 1993. National Identity in Popular Indian Cinema, 1947– 1987. Austin: University of Texas Press. Chatterjee, Partha. 1994. The Nation and its Fragments: Colonial and Postcolonial Histories. New Delhi: Oxford University Press. Chatterjee, Saibal. 1999. “An Indian Samar.” The Outlook, August 23. www.out lookindia.com/magazine/story/an-indian-samar/207978. Accessed on March 29, 2019. Chion, Michel. 1994. Audio-Vision: Sound on Screen. Columbia University Press. Chowdhary, Devayush. 2015. “The ‘New’ Indian New Wave.” The Citizen. Online published on April 26, 2015. www.thecitizen.in/index.php/en/NewsDetail/index/ 8/3366/The-New-Indian-New-Wave. Accessed on April 06, 2019. Datta, Sangeeta. 2000. “Globalization and Representation of Indian Women.” Social Scientist. Vol. 28, (3/4): 71–82. ———. 2008. Shyam Benegal. India: Roli Books. Deleuze, Gilles. 1986. Cinema 1: The Movement-Image. Translated by Hugh Tomlinson and Barbara Habberjam. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press. ———. 1989. Cinema 2: The Time-Image. Translated by Hugh Tomlinson and Robert Galeta. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press. Desai, Ashwin and GoolamVahed. 2015. The South African Gandhi: StretcherBearer of Empire. New Delhi: Navayana. Devasundaram, Ashvin Immanuel. 2016. India’s New Independent Cinema: Rise of the Hybrid. New York: Routledge. Downing, John D. H. ed. 1987. Film and Politics in the Third World. New York: Praeger Publishers.

171

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Dube, Saurabh. 1998. Untouchable Pasts: Religion, Identity and Power among a Central Indian Community-1780–1950. New York: State University of New York Press. ———, ed. 2009. Enchantments of Modernity: Empire, Nation, Globalization. New Delhi: Routledge. Dudley, Andrew. 2004. “Adapting Cinema to History: A Revolution in the Making.” In A Companion to Literature and Film, edited by Robert Stam and Alessandra Raengo. Malden and Oxford: Blackwell Publishing, 189–204. Eagleton, Terry. 1990. The Ideology of the Aesthetic. USA and UK: Blackwell Publishing. Elliott, Kamilla. 2003. Rethinking Novel/Film Debate. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Forster, Edward M. 2005. Aspects of the Novel. Cambridge: Penguin Books. Gardner, Sebastin.1999. Routledge Philosophy Guide Book to Kant and the Critique of Pure Reason. Oxon: Routledge. Genette, Gerard. 1987. Narrative Discourse. Cornell: Cornell University Press. Ginzburg, Carlo. 2001. Wooden Eyes: Nine Reflections on Distance. Translated by Martin Ryle and Kate Soper. New York: Columbia University Press. Gokulsing, K. Moti and Wimal Dissanayake, eds. 2009. Popular Culture in Globalized India. London and New York: Routledge. Guha, Ramchandra. 2007. “Seventies: The Rise, Fall and Rise of Indira Gandhi.” India Today In. Online published on July 02, 2007. www.indiatoday.in/magazine/indiatoday-archives/story/20070702-indira-ghandhis-era-1970s-748420-1999-11-30. Accessed on May, 2015. Gulì, Roberto. 2014. “Film Censorship During Fascism.” Cinecensura. http://cine censura.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/04/Film-censorship-during-Fascism_Guli. pdf. Accessed on April 1, 2019. Guneratne, Anthony R. 2003. Rethinking Third Cinema. New York: Routledge. Gupta, Dipankar. 2000. Interrogating Caste: Understanding Hierarchy & Difference in Indian Society. New Delhi: Penguin Books. ———. 2005. Learning to Forget: The Anti-Memoirs of Modernity. New Delhi: Oxford University Press. ———. 2017. Mistaken Modernity: India Between Worlds. Noida: Harper Collins. Habib, M.A.R. 2008. A History of Literary Criticism and Theory: From Plato to the Present. Malden: Blackwell Publishing. Hall, Stuart. 1989. “Cultural Identity and Cinematic Representation.” In Film and Theory, edited by Robert Stam and Toby Miller. Malden: Blackwell Publishing, 704–714. Hansen, Miriam B. 1999. “The Mass Production of the Senses: Classical Cinema as Vernacular Modernism.” Modernism/modernity. Vol. 6, (2): 59–77. Hartog, Rudolf. 2002. The Sign of the Tiger. New Delhi: Rupa. Harvey, David.1990. The Condition of Postmodernity. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing. Heath, Deana. 2009. “Modernity and Social Justice in Indian Popular Cinema.” In Studies in Inequality and Social Justice: Essays in Honour of Ved Prakash Vatuk, edited by Kira Hall. New Delhi: Archana Publications, 406–422. Hegel, Georg W. Friedrich. 2004. Introductory Lectures on Aesthetics. London: Penguin. Hood, John W. 2009. The Essential Mystery. Hyderabad: Orient Blackswan. Hubel, Teresa. 2012. “From Tawa’if to Wife? Making Sense of Bollywood’s Courtesan Genre.” In The Magic of Bollywood: At Home and Abroad, edited by Anjali Gera Roy. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, 213–233.

172

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Hutcheon, Linda. 2006. A Theory of Adaptation. New York and London: Routledge. Islam, Maidul. 2007. “Imagining Indian Muslims: Looking through the Lens of Bollywood Cinema.” Indian Journal of Human Development. Vol. 1, (2): 403–422. Jacob, Jesse T. and Carlo Franco-Paredes. 2008. “The Stigmatization of Leprosy in India and Its Impact on Future Approaches to Elimination and Control.” PLoS Neglected Tropical Diseases. Online published on January 30, 2008. https://jour nals.plos.org/plosntds/article? id=10.1371/journal.pntd.0000113. Accessed on May 13, 2018. Kaarsholm, Preben. 2010. “Unreal City: Cinematic Representation, Globalization and the Ambiguities of Metropolitan Life.” In City Flicks Indian Cinema and the Urban Experience, edited by Preben Kaarsholm. Calcutta: Seagull, 1–25. Kalia, Ravi. 2006. “Modernism, Modernization and Post-Colonial India: A Reflective Essay.” Planning Perspectives. Vol. 21: 133–156. Kapadia, Karin. 2017. “Introduction.” In Dalit Women: Vanguard of an Alternative Politics in India, edited by S. Anandhi and Karin Kapadia. New York: Routledge. Kazmi, Fareed and Sanjeev Kumar. 2011. “The Politics of Muslim Identity and the Nature of Public Imagination.” European Journal of Economics and Political Studies. Vol. 4, (1): 171–187. Keith, Michael. 2002. “Walter Benjamin, Urban Studies, and the Narratives of City Life.” In A Companion to the City, edited by Gary Bridge and Sophie Watson. Malden: Blackwell Publishing, 410–429. Khan, Muhammad Ashraf and Syeda Zuria Bokhari. 2011. “Portrayal of Muslims in Indian Cinema: A Content Analysis of Movie during (2002–8).” Pakistan Journal of Islamic Research. Vol. 8: 1–15. www.bzu.edu.pk/PJIR/eng1AshrafKhan&Zuria.pdf Khanna, Parul. 2013. “The Brave New World of Indi Films.” The Hindustan Times, December 08. www.hindustantimes.com/brunch/the-brave-new-world-of-indiefilms/story-WCxWo5GFhiEbedltqs61eM.html. Accessed on April 06, 2019. Khilnani, Sunil. 2004. The Idea of India. New Delhi: Penguin Books. Koutsourakis, Angelo. 2017. “Realism is to Think Historically: Overlapping Elements in Lukácsian and Brechtian Theories of Realism.” In The Major Realist Film Theorists, edited by Ian Aitken. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press. Koven, Mikel J. 2008. Film Folklore, and Urban Legends. Toronto and Plymouth: The Scarecrow Press. Kracauer, Sigfried. 1965. Theory of Film: The Redemption of Physical Reality. New York: Oxford University Press. ———.2004. From Caligari to Kracauer: A Psychological History of the German Film. Princeton and Oxford: Princeton University Press. Kumar, Raj. 2019. Dalit Literature and Criticism. Hyderabad: Orient Blackswan. Larsen, Peter. 2010. “Urban Legends: Notes on a Theme in Early Film Theory.” In City Flicks Indian Cinema and the Urban Experience, edited by Preben Kaarsholm. Calcutta: Seagull, 26–39. Lefebvre, Henri. 1991. The Production of Space. Translated by Donald NicholsonSmith. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing. Leitch, Thomas. 2015. “History as Adaptation.” In The Politics of Adaptation: Media Convergence and Ideology, edited by Dan Hassler Forest and Pascal Nikalas. UK: Palgrave Macmillan, 7–20. Leonard, Karen.2013. “Political Players: Courtesans of Hyderabad.” The Indian Economic and Social History Review. Vol. 50, (4): 423–448.

173

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Lothspeich, Pamela. 2009. “The Mahabharata’s Imprint on Contemporary Literature and Film.” In Popular Culture in Globalized India, edited by K. Moti Gokulsing and Wimal Dissanayake. London and New York: Routledge, 82–94. Lukács, Georg. 1971. The Theory of the Novel. Translated by Anna Bostock. London: The Merlin Press. Luz, Ana. 2006. “Places in-between: The Transit(ional) Locations of Nomadic Narratives, Place and Location.” Studies in Environmental Aesthetics and Semiotics V: 143–165. MacCabe, Colin. 1985. Theoretical Essays: Film, Linguistics and Literature. Manchester: Manchester University Press. Mahajan, Shobit. 2014. “Shake It Up.” Education Times, June 23. https://timeso findia.indiatimes.com/home/education/news/Shake-it-up/articleshow/37051488. cms. Accessed on March 15, 2015. Malpas, James. 1997. Realism: Movements in Modern Art. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Mander, Harsh. 2002. Unheard Voices: Stories of Forgotten Lives. New Delhi: Penguin Books. Kindle. Martin-Jones, David. 2011. Deleuze and World Cinema. London and New York: Continuum. Mathews, Rohan D. 2011. The Telengana Movement: Peasant Protests in India, 1946–51. Online published on July 01, 2011. www.ritimo.org/article885. html. Accessed on January 01, 2015. Mazumdar, Ranjani. 2007. Bombay Cinema: An Archive of the City. Ranikhet: Permanent Black. McClintock, Anne. 1993. “Family Feuds: Gender, Nationalism and the Family.” Feminist Review. Vol. 44: 61–80. McClintock, Anne, Amir Mufti and Ella Shohat, eds. 1997. Dangerous Liaisons: Gender, Nation and Postcolonial Perspectives. Minneapolis and London: University of Minnesota Press. Meer, Fatima. 1994. Apprenticeship of a Mahatma: A Biography of M. K. Gandhi, 1869–1914. 2nd revised edition. Durban: Institute of black Research and Madiba Publishers. Menon, Jisha. 2012. The Performance of Partition: India, Pakistan and the Memory of Partition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Metz, Christian. 1974. Film Language: A Semiotics of the Cinema. Translated by M. Taylor. New York: Oxford University Press. Mir, Farina. 2010. The Social Space of Language: Vernacular Culture in British Colonial Punjab. Berkeley: University of California Press. Mitra, Ashok. 1977. Calcutta Diary. England: Frank Cass and Company. Monaco, James. 2000. How to Read a Film: Movies, Media, Multimedia. Oxford and New York: Oxford University Press. Nanda, Meera. 2009. The God Market. New York: Random House. Nandy, Ashis. 2001. An Ambiguous Journey to the City: The Village and Other Odd Ruins of the Self in the Indian Imagination. New Delhi: Oxford University Press. Needham, Anuradha D.2016. New Indian Cinema in Post-Independence India: The Cultural Work of Shyam Benegal’s Films. New York: Routledge. Orr, Christopher. 1985. “Written on the Wind and the Ideology of Adaptation.” Film Criticism. Vol. 9, (3): 1–8.

174

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Pathak, Dr. Avjit. 2013. Indian Modernity: Contradictions, Paradoxes and Possibilities. New Delhi: Gyan Publishing House. Prakash, Gyan. 2002. “The Urban Turn.” In Sarai Reader 02: The Cities of Everyday Life. New Delhi: Sarai-The New Media Initiative. Perron, Lalita Du. 2002. “Thumri: A Discussion of the Female Voice of Hindustani Music.” Modern Asian Studies. Vol. 36, (1): 173–193. Peters, Curtis H. 1993. Kant’s Philosophy of Hope. New York: Peter Lang. Phillip, Robert. 1996. “History Teaching, Cultural Restoration and National Identity in England and Wales.” Curriculum Studies. Vol. 4, (3): 385–399. Prasad, Madhav. 1998. The Ideology of Indian Cinema: A Historical Construction. New Delhi: Oxford University Press. ———. 2010. “Realism and Fantasy in the Representation of Metropolitan Life in Indian Cinema.” In City Flicks Indian Cinema and the Urban Experience, edited by Preben Kaarsholm. Calcutta: Seagull, 82–98. Prince, Gerald. 1982. Narratology: The Form and Functioning of Narrative. Berlin: Mouton. ———. 1987. A Dictionary of Narratology. Nebraska: University of Nebraska Press. Rajadhyaksha, Ashish. 2003. “The ‘Bollywoodization’ of the Indian Cinema: Cultural Nationalism in a Global Arena.” Inter-Asia Cultural Studies. Vol. 4, (1): 25–39. Rajadhyaksha, Ashish and Paul Willman. 2004. The Encyclopaedia of Indian Cinema. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Rancière, Jacques. 2007. The Future of Image. Translated by Gregory Elliott. London and Brooklyn: Verso. ———. 2011. The Politics of Aesthetics: The Distribution of the Sensible. Translated by Gabriel Rockhill. London, New Delhi, and New York: Bloomsbury. Ricci, Steven. 2008. Italian Cinema and Fascism, 1922–1943. Berkeley: University of California Press. Rosenstone, Robert A. 2006. History on Films/Films on History. London and New York: Pearson Longman. Roy, Tirathankar. 1998. “Economic Reforms and Textile Industry in India.” Economic & Political Weekly. Vol. 33, (32): 2173–2182. Sachdeva, Vivek. 2004. “Narrative Dislocations, Multiple Perspectivism and the Concept of Selfhood in Shyam Benegal’s Zubeidaa.” Dialog, no.12: 78-90. _______. 2007. “Narrative as a Signifier-with reference to Shyam Benegal’s Sardari Begum.” Dialog, no. 17: 41-56. _______2015. “Identity Politics and the Muslim Other.” Brukenthalia-Romanian Cultural History Review. Vol. 5: 965–973. ———. 2016. “Liminal Cultural and Cinematic Spaces in Shyam Benegal’s Welcome to Sajjanpur and Well done Abba.” The Journal of Popular Culture. Vol. 9, (5): 1146–1162. ———. 2017. Fiction to Film: Ruth Prawer Jhabvala’s the Householder and Heat and Dust. Hyderabad: Orient Blackswan. _______. 2020. Adapting Gandhi/Kasturba in The Making of the Mahatma. In Refocus: The Films of Shyam Benegal. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press. Salam, Zia Us. 1976. “Manthan.” The Hindu. Online published on September 13, 2002. www.thehindu.com/features/cinema/manthan-1976/article3892670. ece. Accessed on February 01, 2017.

175

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Sanders, Julie. 2006. Adaptation and Appropriation: The New Critical Idiom. London and New York: Routledge. Sarkar, Bhaskar. 2010. Mourning the Nation: Indian Cinema in the Wake of Partition. Hyderabad: Orient Blackswan. Sauer, Matthew E. 1992. “Nigeria and India: The Use of Film for DevelopmentWhispers in a Crowd” authored by, published in African Media Review. Vol. 6, (1): 25–33. Scholz, Anne-Marie. 2013. From Fidelity to History: Film Adaptations as Cultural Events in the Twentieth Century. New York and Oxford: Berghahn. Sen, Meheli. 2011. “Vernacular Modernities and Fitful Globalities in Shyam Benegal’s Cinematic Provinces.” Many cinemas: 1. Shermen, Sharon R. and Mikel J. Koven, eds. 2007. Folklore/Cinema: Popular Film as Vernacular Culture. Logan: Utah State University Press. Shklovsky, Viktor. 1917. “Art as Technique.” https:warwick.ac.uk/fac/arts/english/ currentstudents/undergraduate/modules/fulllist/first/en122/lecturelist-2015-16-2/ shklovsky.pdf. Accessed on March 14, 2019. SinghaRoy, Debal K. 2004. Peasant Movements in Post-Colonial India: Dynamics of Mobilization and Identity. New Delhi, Thousand Oaks, CA, and London: Sage Publications. Stam, Robert. 2005. Literature through Film: Realism, Magic, and the Art of Adaptation. Malden: Blackwell Publishing. Stam, Robert and Alessandro Raengo, eds. 2005. Literature and Film: A Guide to the Theory and Practice of Film Adaptation. Malden: Blackwell Publishing. Soja, Edward W. 1996. Thirdspace: Journeys to Los Angeles and Other Real and Imagined Places. Cambridge: Blackwell Publishing. Sundaram, Ravi. 2010. “Imaging Urban Breakdown: Delhi in the 1990.” In Noir Urbanism: Dystopic Images of the Modern City, edited by Gyan Prakash. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 241–260. Sundarayya, Sri Putchalpalli. 1972. Telangana People’s Struggle and Its Lessons. Calcutta: Desraj Chaddha on behalf of Communist Party of India (Marxist). Tanvir, Habib. 2004. Charandas Chor. New Delhi: Vani Prakashan. Thapar, Romila. 2003. The Penguin History of Early India from Origins to AD 1300. New Delhi: Penguin Books. Thomson-Jones, Katherine. 2008. Aesthetics and Film. London and New York: Continuum. Thoraval, Yves. 2007. The Cinemas of India (1896–2000). New Delhi: Palgrave Macmillan. Tucker, David, ed. 2011. British Social Realism in the Arts since 1940. UK: Palgrave Macmillan. Turner, Victor. 1969. The Ritual Process: Structure and Anti Structure. Ithaca: Cornell University Press. Umbach, Meiken and Bernd Hüpppauf, eds. 2005. Vernacular Modernism: Heimat, Globalization, and the Built Environment. CA: Stanford University Press. Unni, Arvind. 2011. “Reading the Muslim Space in Bombay (Mumbai) through Cinema.” Paper presented at the international RC21 conference 2011 Session: RT 14.2 Religion, Media and Urban Space. Van der Heide, William, ed. 2006. Bollywood Babylon: Interviews with Shyam Benegal. Oxford: Berg.

176

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Vasudevan, Ravi S. 2010. The Melodramatic Public: Film Form and Spectatorship in Indian Cinema. Ranikhet: Permanent Black. Verma, Rahul. 2011. “Beyond Bollywood: Indian Cinema’s New Cutting Edge.” The Guardian. Online published on June 23, 2011. www.theguardian.com/film/2011/ jun/23/india-independent-cinema. Accessed on March 25, 2015. Vermeuen, Timotheus. J. V. 2010. Rev. of Jacques Rancière (2007) the Future of the Image. Translated by G. Elliott. London and New York: Verso. Culture Machine, February,1–7. www.culturemachine.net/index.php/cm/article/download/394/412. Accessed on June 23, 2017. Vicino, Thomas J., Bernadette Hanlon and John Rennie Short. 2007. “Megalopolis 50 Years On: The Transformation of a City Region.” International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, Blackwell. Vol. 31, (2): 344–367. Vickers, Jill.2006. “Bringing Nations in: Some Methodological and Conceptual Issues in Connecting Feminisms with Nationhood and Nationalisms.” International Feminist Journal of Politics. Vol. 8, (1): 84–109. Villanueva, Dario. 1997. Theories of Literary Realism. Translated by Mihai I. Spariousu and Santiago García-Canstañón. Albany: State University of New York Press. Virdi, Jyotika. 2003. The Cinematic Imagination: Indian Popular Films as History. Ranikhet: Permanent Black. Vlassoff, Carol, Seemantinee Khot and Shoba Ray. 1996. “Double Jeopardy: Women and Leprosy in India.” World Health Statics Quarterly. Vol. 49, (2): 120–126. https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/6879/386cce4c894260133e04c40fd35819 f2f576. pdf. Accessed on April 26, 2018. W, J. M. 1975. “Documents of Film Theory: Riccioto Canudo’s ‘Manifesto of the Seven Arts’” Literature/Film Quarterly. Vol. 3, (3): 252–254. Wadkar, Hansa. 2013. You Ask, I Tell. Translated by Jasbir Jain and Shobha Shinde. New Delhi: Zubaan. White, Hayden. 1990. The Content of the Form: Narrative Discourse and Historical Representation. Baltimore and London: The Johns Hopkins University Press. Williams, Raymond. 1978. “Realism, Naturalism and Their Alternatives.” CineTracts 77. Vol. 1, (3): 1–6. Yule, Henry and Arthur Coke Burnell. 1996. Hobson-Jobson: The Anglo-Indian Dictionary. Herefordshire: Wordsworth Editions. Yves, Rédigé par. 2015. “Kondura: Religious Power Is Stronger Than Men.” Let’s Talk about Bollywood. Online published on February 14, 2015. www.letstalkaboutbol lywood.com/article-kondura-religious-power-is-stronger-than-men-125530261. html. Accessed on March 26, 2019.

177

FILMOGRAPHY

Aarohan (The Ascent, 1982). Dir. Shyam Benegal. Writ. Shama Zaidi. Perf: Om Puri, Victor Banerjee, Pankaj Kapoor. Prod. Department of Information and Culture, Govt. of Bengal. Ankur (The Seedling, 1974). Dir. Shyam Benegal. Perf: ShabanaAzmi, Anant Nag, Sadhu Meher, Priya Tendulkar. Prod. Blaze Film Enterprise. Antarnaad (The Inner Voice, 1991). Dir. Shyam Benegal. Writ. Shama Zaidi, Shanbaug. Perf: Kulbhushan Kharbanda, Shabana Azmi, Om Puri, K.K. Raina. Prod. Suhetu Films. Bhumika (The Role, 1977). Dir. Shyam Benegal. Writ. Shyam Benegal, GirishKarnad, Satyadev Dubey, Perf: Smita Patil, Amol Palekar, Anant Nag, Amrish Puri. Prod. Blaze Film Enterprise, Lalita Bijlani, Freni Variava. Charandas Chor (Charandas, the Thief, 1975). Dir. Shyam Benegal. Perf: Smita Patil, Sadhu Meher, Anjali Paigankar, Habib Tanvir. Prod. Children’s Film Society, Lalita Bijlani, Freni Variava. Hari-Bhari (2000). Dir. Shyam Benegal. Writ. Shama Zaidi. Perf: Shabana Azmi, Rajeshwari Sachdev, Nandita Das, Rajit Kapur. Prod. Ministry of Family Welfare. Junoon (Possessed, 1978). Dir. Shyam Benegal. Perf: Shashi Kapoor, Jennifer Kendal, Shabana Azmi, Kulbhushan Kharbanda, Naseeruddin Shah. Prod. Filmvallas, Shashi Kapoor. Kalyug (The Machine Age, 1981). Dir. Shyam Benegal. Writ. Shyam Benegal, Girish Karnad, Satyadev Dubey. Perf: Shashi Kapoor, Rekha, Anant Nag, Kulbhushan Kharbanda, Victor Bannerjee. Prod. Filmvalls, Shashi Kapoor. Kondura (The Boon, 1977). Dir. Shyam Benegal. Writ. Girish Karnad, Shyam Benegal and Arudra. Perf: Anant Nag, Smita Patil, Vanisree, Shekhar Chatterjee. Prod. Raviraj International. The Making of the Mahatma (1995). Dir. Shyam Benegal. Writ. Fatima Mir, Shama Zaidi, Shyam Benegal. Perf: Rajit Kapoor, Pallavi Joshi, Keath Stevens. Prod. NFDC, Doordarshan. Mammo (Grandmother, 1994). Dir. Shyam Benegal. Writ. Khaled Mohamed, Shama Zaidi. Perf: Farida Jalal, Surekha Sikri, Rajit Kapoor. Prod. NFDC, Doordarshan. Mandi (The Market Place, 1983). Dir. Shyam Benegal. Writ. Shyam Benegal, Satyadev Dubey, Shama Zaidi. Perf: Smita Patil, Shabana Azmi, Naseeruddin Shah, Kulbhushan Kharbanda. Prod. Blaze Film Enterprise, Lalita Bijlani, Freni Variava.

178

FILMOGRAPHY

Manthan (The Churning, 1976). Dir. Shyam Benegal. Perf: Smita Patil, Girish Karnad, Amrish Puri, Naseeruddin Shah. Gujarat Co-Operative Milk Marketing Federation, Sahyadri Films. Netaji Subhas Chandra Bose: The Forgotten Hero (2004). Dir. Shyam Benegal. Writ. Atul Tiwari, Shama Zaidi. Perf: Sachin Khedekar, Kulbhushan Kharbanda, Rajit Kapur, Divya Dutta. Prod. Raj Pius, Barbara von Wrangell. Nishant (Night’s End, 1975). Dir. Shyam Benegal. Perf: Shabana Azmi, Girish Karnad, Amrish Puri, Anant Nag, Naseeruddin Shah. Prod. Blaze Film Enterprise. Samar (Conflict, 1998). Dir. Shyam Benegal. Writ. Ashok Mishra. Perf: Rajit Kapoor, Rajeshwari Sachdev, Kishore Kadam, Seema Biswas. Prod. Ministry of Social Justice and Empowerment. Sardari Begum (1996). Dir. ShyamBenegal. Writ. Shama Zaidi. Perf: Kiron Kher, Rajit Kapoor, Smriti Mishra, Amrish Puri. Prod. Plus Films. Suraj Ka Saatvan Ghoda (The Seventh Sun of the Horse, 1992). Dir. Shyam Benegal. Writ. Shama Zaidi. Perf: Rajit Kapoor, Pallavi Joshi, Neena Gupta, Rajeshwari Sachdev, AmrishPuri. Prod. NFDC, Doordarshan. Susman (The Essence, 1986). Dir. Shyam Benegal. Writ. Shyam Benegal, Shama Zaidi. Perf: Shabana Azmi, Om Puri, Neena Gupta, Kulbhushan Kharbanda. Prod. Association of Cooperatives and Apex Society of Handlooms. Trikal (Past, Present and Future, 1985). Dir. Shyam Benegal. Writ. Shyam Benegal, Shama Zaidi. Perf: Leela Naidu, Naseeruddin Shah, Neena Gupta, Dilip Tahil. Prod. Blaze Film Enterprise, Lalita Bijlani, Freni Variava. Welcome to Sajjanpur (2008). Dir. Shyam Benegal. Writ. Shyam Benegal, Ashok Mishra. Perf: Shyreas Talpade, Amrita Rao, Kunal Kapoor, Ravi Jhankal. Prod. Ronnie Screwvala, Chetan Motivala. Well Done Abba (2009). Dir. Shyam Benegal. Writ. Shyam Benegal, Ashok Mishra. Perf: Boman Irani, Minnisha Lamba, Ravi Kishan. Prod. Raj Pius, Mahesh Ramanathan. Zubeidaa (2001). Dir. Shyam Benegal. Writ. Khaled Mohamed. Perf: Karishma Kapoor, Manoj Bajpai, Rekha, Amrish Puri. Prod. Firoz Rattansi.

179

INDEX

Aarohan (The Ascent 1983) 135–139 Abbas, Ghulam 55, 56, 60 Abraham, John 10 Adorno, Theodor 12 aesthetic movement 13 aesthetic realism 14 African National Congress 115 aggressive masculinity 47 Aitken, Ian 15 Ajantrik 8 Alam Ara 4 Ali, Nafisa 83 alienation effect 135 Alladdin and the Wonderful Lamp 5 All India Kisan Sabha 32 alternate cinema 10 Ambedkar, B.R. 29 American War of Independence 2, 126 Amrapurkar, Sadashiv 150 Amu 19 Anand, Chetan 5, 6 Anderson, Benedict 3 Andha Yug 91 Andhra Mahasabha 32 Anglo-Indian identity 82 Ankahee 130 Ankur (The Seedling), 1974 12, 31, 33–36, 40, 43–45, 78, 135 Antarnad (The Inner Voice 1991) 24, 145–147 anti-colonial nationalism 6 Anveshi 28 Apna Paraya 52 An Apprenticeship of the Mahatma 109 Aravindan, G. 10 Arora, Prakash 5 “artistic” cinema 11 Athavale, Pandurang Shastri 145

Ati Shudra 28 Atma, C.H. 51 Attenborough, Richard 113 Audio-Vision 10 Aurat 48 Auteur Theory 11 Awara 6 Azmi, Shabana 83, 145, 157, 158 Babbar, Raj 91 Bachchan, Amitabh 11 Bajirao Mastani 5 Bakshi, Rajni 151 Banerjee, Victor 91, 135, 136 Bano, Jeelani 163 Bano, Shabnam Mausi 162 Baumgarten, Alexander 12 Bedi, Rajinder Singh 7 Begum, Fatma 5 Bell, David 166 Benegal, Shyam 55, 91, 109, 130 Bengal Renaissance 127 Berlin International Film Festival 21 Bhabha, Homi 2, 4 Bharti, Dharamvir 91, 95, 99 Bhaskar, Ira 20 Bhatia, Vanraj 33, 36, 83, 91, 95, 104, 140, 148, 157 Bhatt, Nanubhai 5 Bhumika (The Role, 1977) 50–55, 61, 78, 93 Bhuvan Shome 8 The Birth of a Nation 3 Biswas, Seema 151, 152 Bluestone, George 79 Boer Wars 111 Bond, Ruskin 80, 82, 84 Boot Polish 5

180

INDEX

Bose, Netaji Subhash Chandra103, 117–124 Bose, Satyen 5 Bose, Sugata 122 Brahmanical supremacy 29 Brahmchari (1968) 137 Brahmin 30 Brecht, Bertolt 14, 15 Brecht-Lukács debate 14 Bulbule Pristan 5 The Cabinet of Dr. Caligari 3 cahiers du cinéma 11, 13 Cannes Film Festival 21 Canudo, Riccitto 4 capitalist consumerist society 19 caste system 28 Chabrol, Claude 11, 13 Chakravarty, Sumita 59 Chandrasekar, Priya 157 Charandas Chor (1975) 80, 85–90 Chaterrjee, Partha 127 Chatterjee, Bankim Chander 127 Chatterjee, Basu 7, 8 Chatterjee, Saibal 148 Chatterjee, Sarat Chandra 96 Chatterjee, Shekar 131 Chatterjee, Shoma 75 Chopra, B.R. 5 Chopra, Yash 5 Chor Chor 86 Chugtai, Ismat 69, 83 cinematic realism 66 cinematic space 3 cinematic works 1 commercial cinema 11 communal violence 70 consumerism 162 contestations, Indian modernity 126–154 co-operative society 141 Courbet, Gustave 13 Crawford, Joan 51 cultural institution, cinema 3 dalams 32 Dalit Panthers Manifesto 33 dalit women 28 Dancing Scenes from the Flowers of Persia 4 Das, Nandita 157, 158 Dasgupta, Buddhadeb 10, 20 Datta, Sangeeta 20, 51, 138

David, Joan 146 defamiliarisation 16 Deleuze, Gilles 124 democracy 129 Desai, Morarji 88 deshmukhs 31 de Sicca 13 Detha, Vijaydan 85, 88, 89 Devdas 96, 99, 101 Devdas phenomenon 99, 100 developmental aesthetics 9, 19 Devi, Mahashweta 90 Dhool Ka Phool 5 Dhotiwala, Rustamji 5 Divakurni, Chitra Banerjee 90–91 Divekar, Vishnupant 5 Dividha 86 Dixit, Madhuri 153 Do Aankhen Barah Haath 5 Do Bigha Zameen 6 Dubey, Lillete 72 Dubey, Satyadev 55, 83, 91 Dudley, Andrew 103 Dudrah, Rajinder 20 Durga 52 Dutt, Guru 5, 6, 10, 20, 60 Dutta, Sangeeta 38, 66, 148 Duvidha 85 Dwyer, Rachel 20 economic hardships 141, 143 Elliott, Kamilla 79 emergency film 41 empowerment, assertion 28–46 enunciation 29 Esplanade Mansion 4 Faiz, Faiz Ahmed 67 fictional narrative 100 film adaptations 79, 80, 89 Film Finance Corporation (F.F.C.) 8 film narratives 1 first public screening 4 A Flight of Pigeons 80 folklore films 89 folk-tales 89, 90 foreign film domination 5 foreign film theatres 9 Forster, E.M. 138 four ages, Hindu concept 94 four-tier Varna system 28 Franco-Paredes, Carlo 149 French Revolution 2, 13, 126

181

INDEX

Gandhi, Indira 8, 33, 41, 42, 44, 87, 88, 93 Gandhi, Kasturba 111, 112 Gandhi, Mohandas Karamchand 29, 31, 69, 103, 109–117, 128 Gandhi, Rajmohan 117 Ganguly, Noni 135 Garam Hawa 12, 69, 70 gender differences 47 Ghatak, Ritwik 7–9 Ghose, Goutam 10 Ghosh, Prafful 5 Gnuraya Ani Chani 130 Goan Christians 106, 107 Godard, Jean-Luc 11, 13 Gopalakrishnan, Addor 10 The Great Indian Novel 90 Griffith, D.W. 3 Gupta, Dipankar 30 Gupta, Neena 96 Hall, Stuart 29 Hamara Ghar 5 Hardy, Thomas 54 Hari-Bhari (2000) 19, 25, 153, 155, 157–160 Hariharan, K. 10 Harijans 31 Hatim Tai 5 Higson, Andrew 4 Hindi cinema 2, 4–6, 9, 10, 17, 20, 48, 59; cultural dominance of 7 Hindutava ideology 1, 29, 60, 71 historical biopics 108 historical story 102 Historical Time Frame (T1) 32 history, adaptation 102–125 Homi Bhabha Fellowship 21 Hood, John W. 66 Hughes, Ted 4 Hüpppauf, Bernd 161, 166 Hutcheon, Linda 79, 103, 108 Hyderabad 56, 57 Idea of India, The 75 identity formation 29 Ikat 140 Imagined Communities 3 Indian cinema 4, 8, 9 Indian free market economy 18 Indian modernity 22 Indian New Wave 17

Indian popular cinema 49 Industrial Revolution 126 Irani, Ardeshir 4 Islam, Maidul 70 Italian neo-realism 7, 13 Jacob, Jesse T. 149 jagirdars 31 Jagriti 5 Jalaal, Farida 67 Jantana Adalat 136 Jayne, Mark 166 Jhankal, Ravi 96, 148, 150 Joshi, Pallavi 96, 143 Junoon (1978) 80–90, 135 Kaamloops Dian Machhian 68 Kabir 139–142 Kadam, Kishore 147, 150–152 Kalamandir, Rajkamal 52 Kalavantis 51 Kalyug (The Machine Age, 1981) 80, 90–95 Kanwar, Anita 104 Kapoor, Karishma 19, 72, 153 Kapoor, Pankaj 60, 137 Kapoor, Pankar 143 Kapoor, Raj 5, 6, 10 Kapoor, Rajit 61, 62, 67, 119, 148, 150 Kapoor, Shakti 72 Kapoor, Shashi 83, 91 Kapur, Rajit 95, 159 Karanth, B.V. 10 Karnad, Girish 10, 11, 91, 130 Kaul, Mani 7, 8, 86 Keats, John 107 Kendal, Jennifer 83 Khadekar, Sachin 118 Khan, Abdul Karin 63 Khan, Ahmed 118 Khan, Bade Ghulam Ali 63 Khan, Mehboob 5, 6, 48 Khanolkar, Chintamani Tryambak 130 Kharbanda, Kulbhushan 91, 105, 118, 145 Khilnani, Sunil 75 Khosla Ka Ghosla 19 Khurana, Akash 91 Khusro, Amir 83, 84 Kishan, Ravi 164 Komal Gandhar 8 Kondura (1978) 78, 130–134

182

INDEX

mise-en-scène 57, 68 Mishra, Ashok 148 Mishra, B.P. 5 Mishra, Ganganath 41, 43 Mitra, Ashok 139 Mittal, Nand Kishore 86 Modi, Narendra 123 mofussil spaces 155–169 Mohamed, Khalid 61, 66, 71 moral corruption 161 Moscow International Film Festival 21 Mother India 5, 6 multi-crore 18 Murch, Walter 10 Muslim community 60 Muslim identity 50, 69–71, 74 Mussolini 3 mutual intertextuality 89 My Experiments With Truth 116

Kothari, Rajan 117, 157 Koutsourakis, Angelo 16 Koven, Mikel J. 89 Kripalani, Jayant 163 Krishanraj, Maithreyi 48 Krishan Sudma 5 Kshatriya 30 land reforms 129 Land Reforms Act of 1955 135 Lefebvre, Henri 165 Leonard, Karen 56 liberal economy 18, 100 liberalisation 17, 19; economic policies 1 linguistic identity 4 Lokshahir Ram Joshi 52 London Film Festival 117 Lothspeich, Pamela 93 Lumière brothers 4 Luz, Ana 156 MacCabe, Colin 14 macrocosm 161 Madan, J.J. 5 Mahabharata 90–95 Mahendra, B. 10 Majlis-i-Itehad 32 Mazumdar, Ranjani 20 Majumdar, Sreela 137 The Making of the Mahatma (1996) 108, 109–117, 124 Mammo (1994) 61, 66–71, 75 Mandela, Nelson 109, 114, 115 Mander, Harsh 147, 148 Mandi (1983) 55–61, 78 Manthan (The Churning, 1976) 31, 33, 40–45 Manto, Saadat Hasan 67, 71 marginalised communities 103 Mathews, Rohan D. 32 Matsyagandha 145, 146 Mazumdar, Ranjani 6 Meer, Fatima 109, 111, 112, 116, 117, 124 Mee Tulas Tuzya Angani 52 Meghe Dhake Tara 8 Meher, Sadhu 87 Mehta, Ketan 12 Mera Gaon 52 Mir, Farina 48 Mirch Masala 12

Nag, Anant 91 Naidu, Leela 104 Nanda, Meera 50 narrative discourse 98 narratives 2, 98, 100, 102 Narrative Time Frame (T2) 31 Narsaiyyan Ki Bavdi 163 National Film Development Corporation (N.F.D.C.) 11 nation-building 5 Naya Daur 5, 6 Needham, Anuradha D. 20, 117 Nehru, Jawaharlal 122, 128, 163 Netaji Subhash Chandra Bose: The Forgotten Hero (2004) 108, 117–124 New (Middle) Cinema 18, 155–169 new economic model India 100 New Wave movement 11 Nihalani, Govind 33, 83, 91, 94 Nishant (Night’s End, 1975) 31, 33, 36–40, 43, 44, 135 Noojehan 5 The Obeisance 148 Operation Bargadar 135, 136 Operation Flood 41 Osten, Franz 52 otherization 71, 115 The Palace of Illusions 91 Palekar, Amol 86 parallel cinema 2, 11, 20

183

INDEX

Pathak, Dina 145 Pather Panchali 20 Patil, Smita 131 patriarchal society 157 Peasants’ Revolt in Andhra Pradesh 31, 36, 40 Pendharkar, Bhalji 5 Pereira, Ruiz 106 Peters, C.H. 102 Pfaff, Anita Bose 122, 123 Phalke, Dadasaheb 4 philosophical foundation, modernity 126 Phule, Jyotirao 48 Phule, Savitribai 48 Phulwa Ka Pul 163 political commentaries, adaptations 78–101 political films 93 polyphonic narrative 85 Prakash, Gyan 165 Prakash, Shushma 104 Prasad, Jaishankar 96 Prasad, Madhav 14, 20, 41 privatisation 94 purda system 48 Puri, Amrish 61, 72, 97 Puri, Om 91, 135, 136, 147 Pyaasa 6, 60 racial discrimination 114, 115 Rahman, A.R. 19, 153 Raina, K.K. 104 Raja Harishchandra 4 Rajan, Surendra 118 Ramayana 38, 40 Ram Janma 5 Ram Shastri 52 Rane, Khustoba 106 Rane, Vijay 106 Rao, Amrita 160 Rao, Manohar 41 rational thinking 128 Ratra Kali Ghagar Kali 130 Ray, Satyajit 8, 9, 20, 94 Razdan, Soni 104 realism 13–14, 16, 153 Reddy, Pattabhi Rama 7, 12 Reddy, Ravi Nayana 32 regional cinemas 2, 4 Rehman, A.R. 117 re-invigorated Congress socialism 9 Rekha 72, 153

Renoir, Jean 13 The Return of Wrangler Paranjpye to India 4 Rodrigues, Amália 105 Rosenstone, Robert A. 109 Rossellini, Roberto 13 Roy, Bimal 5, 6, 10 Sachdev, Rajeshwari 96, 151–153, 157, 158 Salgaonkar, Bhalchandra 51 Salgaonkar, Ratan Bhalchandra 51 Samar (Conflict, 1998) 24, 78, 147–154 Samskara 12 Sanders, Julie 79 Sandhu, Arun 51 Sane, G.V. 5 Sangtye Aika or You Ask, I Tell 50 Sanjeev 163 Sant Sakhu 52 Sara Akash 8 Sardari Begum (1996) 61–66, 71, 75 sarees 140 Sarf-e-khasi 31 Sathyu, M.S. 7, 10–12, 69 Sati Tulsi Vrinda 5 Satyanam Saar 88 Sehgal, K.L. 51 self-empowerment 44 self-reflexive narrative strategy 148 self-reflexivity 100 Sen, Hirala 4 Sen, Manik 65 Sen, Meheli 164 Sen, Mrinal 8, 9, 20 seventh art form 4 Shah, Naseeruddin 85, 104 Shah, Piyush 95 Shakuntala 5 Shanbag, Sunil 145 Shantaram, V. 5, 6, 52 Sharawat, Vinod 72 Sherman, Sharon R. 89 Shklovsky, Viktor 17 Shudra 30 Siddiqui, Javed 66 Sikri, Surekha 61, 67, 157, 158 Singh, Atamjit 68 Singh, Suchet 5 social change 7; narratives 28–46 social evils 127 social function 5, 12, 96

184

INDEX

socialist realism 13 social order 30, 31 social reality 10, 15, 16 social reform movement 48 socio-religious reform 48 Srivastava, Alka 157, 158 Stam, Robert 79 state ideology 1 Stevenson 4 Stewart, James B. 4 Still Waters 163 storytelling 168 Subarnarekha 8 Sundaram, Ravi 156 Suraj Ka Saatvan Ghoda (The Seventh Horse of the Sun, 1992) 80, 95–101 Susman (The Essence 1987) 139–145 Swadhaya Movement 24, 145 Tahil, Dilip 105 taking narratives 23 Tales from Kurukshetra 90 Talpade, Shreyas 160 Tanvir, Habib 85, 86, 89 Telengana Revolt 31 Tendulkar, Vijay 36 Thakur, Chaman 97 Tharoor, Shashi 90 Thoraval, Yves 11, 20 thumri songs 64 Tiwari, Atul 117 Toba Tek Singh 71 transgression 39 Transvaal Law 3 of 1885 110 Treaty of Westphalia 2, 126 Trikal (Past, Present and Future, 1985) 103–109 Trishanku 130 Truffaut, Francois 11, 13 truth-to-nature 14 Umbach, Meiken 161, 166 Unheard Voices: Stories of Forgotten Lives 147, 148 untouchables 28

Urdu cinema 4 Uski Roti 8 Vaishya 30 Vajpayee, Manoj 72 Valicha, Kishore 38 van der Heide, William 109, 111, 115 Vanisri 130 Vanita, Ruth 59 Vasudev, Aruna 8 Vasudevan, Ravi 20 verbal signs 78 Vickers, Jill 47 Vidyasagar, Ishwar Chander 127 Villanueva, Dario 15 Virdi, Jyotika 6, 20, 49 visual signs 78–79 Vitagraph and Moto-photoshop 4 Vivekananda, Swami 127 Vyas, Shrivallabh 62 Wadkar, Hansa 50–52, 55 weavers 140, 141, 144 Wednesday 19 Welcome to Sajjanpur (2008) 19, 25, 155, 160–163 Well Done Abba (2009) 19, 25, 155, 163–168 Welles, Orson 13 White, Hayden 102, 108 White Revolution in Gujarat 31 Wiene, Robert 3 women, nation and 47–77 writing the nation 3 Yadav, Raghuvir 95 Yadav, Rajpal 118, 152 Young Bengal 127 Yves, Rédigé par 133 Zaheer, S.M. 62, 72 Zaidi, Shama 36, 41, 55, 61, 66, 86, 95, 104, 109, 117, 140, 145, 157 Zubeidaa (2001) 19, 61, 71–75, 153 Zulu Uprising 111

185