A Marriage Of Cultures
(Hi, This is my first ever post for the site. There was a plan to write something more topical/attractive, but this just happened to sit on the desktop waiting to go out and so. I have been writing extensively on theatre and alternative cinema for publications. There will be more from that comfort niche of mine, but for now, here is a loosely knit article that surfaced from a little drilling about why we make what we make.)
One of those best of Madan Mohan collections has him speaking about his craft. With a characteristic understated passion he recounted what it took to craft a melody. The result was work that was sophisticated and accomplished, popular at the time and classic ever since. Why is it that today’s Indian finds it so hard to create what might be popular and artistically/intellectually gratifying? Why has the gulf between sensible critical acclaim and mass appeal widened beyond comprehension when it comes to art in general and cinema in particular?
We are negotiating with a very important curb in our history where economic growth, dominance and discrepancy are the preoccupation in all quarters. Are we making any classics along the way though? In these times of the pettiest of bloody politics and a surging feel-good factor despite of it, what is happening to our art?
Bed and Board is a classic as nearly all films directed by Francois Truffaut are thought to be. It is a deceptively simple tale of a marriage and its graph principally. Antoine is married to a violinist and lives out his days in a quaint neighborhood dyeing flowers for a living. Their blissfully ordinary existence is threatened when Antoine embarks on a nearly inexplicable affair with a Japanese woman. Drawn apart (after a dramatic scene in which his wife on discovery of his infidelity greets him in a horrific madame butterfly getup), they are nonetheless unable to settle down without one another and come back together soon enough. This ‘end’ however is happy in only a skeptical sort of way as they are shown not to live ‘happily ever after’ but slip into a life of stable bickering indifference.
Truffaut’s classic brings to mind our cinematic middle class spokesperson Aziz Mirza’s Chalte Chalte or atleast the second half of it.
After reliving his Dilwale Dulhaniya Le Jayenge role in a less flamboyant, more vulnerable avatar, Shahrukh Khan(Raj again)settles down in a middle class neighbourhood in Mumbai with his much different wife, Priya.
The ordinariness of their life is shown among familiar character sketches of ‘regular people’ reminiscent of the ‘Nukkad’ life. The wife cooks, cleans, shops for veggies while anda-walas and dhobis walk in and out of her tiny apartment. The husband does his job, hangs with his buddies, comes back home to bicker with wife or woo her with his boyish charm. The break here is not an extra marital affair but Raj’s brash, complexed mindset. He is jealous, loud and feels inferior. In both films the ‘fault’ comes from the husband but it was too much to expect a mainstream hindi film hero to cross the sacred line of sexual commitment up until Karan Johar’s rebellious but misguided Kabhi Alvida Na Kehna. Nonetheless Raj is grey and real. He broods dramatically and displays only melancholic shades of anger, depression and longing after the wife leaves. Naturally Truffaut is not given to such show of undiluted emotion. Antoine’s journey is highly personal and internal – his attachment to his wife is palpable but never obvious. Equally stark is the wife’s ‘forgiveness’ of her husband in the end in contrast to Chalte Chalte’s traditional teary climax (replete with sukhwinder singh’s heart rendering high pitch). The end is happier here despite bickering thrown in for good measure, but then anything would be happy after that melodramatic climax (at the airport, no less).
It would be easy to see, Mirza made Bed and Board within the Bollywood formula (not implying he copied it. It is a theme often visited by writers/filmmakers and common enough not to attract insinuations of plagiarism). But beneath the obvious conclusion is another story – that of our cultural psychology and philosophy. Evidence is simply in the names of the films. Bed and Board, is as stoic as the film- a demystification on the institution of marriage. It intends to reveal the shallow waters of a much-touted social more and strengthens its case with a strong disillusioning end. Chalte Chalte is more poetic (borrowed from one hindi film song or another), conveying a sense of journey, its mystery and even a hint of fatalism, linking up with its own end brimming with ras. The significance of rasas infact is an Indian cultural obsession from time immemorial. Its unpopularity in the west can be gauged by considering there is no equivalent word in the language for it. the closest one can come is a literal ‘syrupy’ which has derogatory intonations. Bed and Board perhaps unintentionally addresses France’s, rather Europe’s fascination with existentialism. In the end it all means little. Chalte Chalte is rooted deeply in india’s unshakeable romanticism that springs from the abundant faith in our DNA. We are the children of God (and literally too, there are castes a dozen claiming descent from one or the other avatar of the holy trinity) and religion is our single-minded passion. Marriage like all else is tied up with it and therefore sacrosanct (to be fair there is little India that is not sacrosanct in some way or the other, even rats). In the final moments of the climax Raj gives away his Allah charm to his wife. This moves her sufficiently to return home and say, “my place in life is with you”. Religion, fatalism and an pursuit of emotional intelligence underpin the formula to audience appreciation. We go to the cinema “leaving our brains at home” (a popular phrase coined by Indian critics to deride/describe most Indian masala movies), but we take our hearts along and how. You can titillate us all you want but you’re not a bumper hit unless you move us, shake us. The difference in Chalte Chalte and Bed and Board is of bad and good cinema, undoubtedly. But the concept of good and bad cinema is derived intellectually in India from the west. But marriages were made in India. Like heaven was.
Anurag Kashyap
Abhay Deol
Dibakar Banerjee
Hansal Mehta
Khalid Mohamed
Kundan Shah
Anish Kuruvilla
Jaideep Verma
Manish Gupta
Navdeep Singh
Bhavani Iyer
D. Santosh
Onir
Ashvin Kumar
Ramu Ramanathan
Sudhir Mishra
Pankaj Advani
Revathy
Saurabh Shukla
Shilpa Shukla
Sujoy Ghosh
Suparn Verma
Santosh Sivan
Shashank Ghosh
Shivajee
Pavan Kaul
Partho Sen-Gupta
Prroshant Naryannan
Sam Langoria
Satish Kasetty
quote -Why has the gulf between sensible critical acclaim and mass appeal widened beyond comprehension – unquote
.
there is a gulf
you belong to the better side of gulf
meaning you are capable of intellectual gratification
and now worried that others are not
.
you would like other intellectually challenged people to strive for betterment in there understanding
aah well that’s compassionate
.
this division also gives one thing
.
if there are levels of intellectuality
and you are at certain level
there must be a level up than your level
.
my point is
are you at the top level
if yes
than what one could say, accept my greetings
if no
than
you accept that there are higher level of intellectuality than level you are at right now
.
since you make the compassion for less intelligent people a inherent quality of intelligence
the people who are more intellectual than you
are also worried about you
for them you are below the level
as for you there are people who are below your level
.
you want
people below your level to come to your level
.
the people who are above you
want you to come to there level
.
every intelligent person is worried about the people who are less intelligent than him
.
be not surprised
the people whom you consider below your level
also has the same worry
.
they too are concerned about the people who are less intelligent than they are
.
why not break this vicious circle
.
why not you, for a change
look up
and see what the people above you are thinking
quote – In these times of the pettiest of bloody politics -unquote
.
are you sure about it
that this time is really bad
.
a stone with inscription was unearthed in china
it is some five thousand years old
and it reads like a newspaper of today
.
complaining about rotten society
.
jesus said
‘thous shalt not commit adultery’
proves that even at the time of jesus adultery was very much there
.
let me remind you the incident of dhobi in ramayan
his wife was absent for one night
in that context he said that ‘i am not ram, i will not accept you back’
.
politics was there in the time of jesus
politics was there in the time of krishna
and it was as petty as it is today
.
what makes you think that this time is something special
.
don’t give me that
since you are here on earth
this time has to be special
.
because
otherwise
it has always been same
will always be same
quote – cross the sacred line of sexual commitment up until Karan Johar’s rebellious but misguided Kabhi Alvida Na Kehna – unquote
.
karan johar is my hero
because as you said kank was rebellious
quote – Equally stark is the wife’s ‘forgiveness’ of her husband in the end in contrast to Chalte Chalte’s traditional teary climax (replete with sukhwinder singh’s heart rendering high pitch – unquote
.
if i am right
you prefer –what is it – traffu, traffuutt – whatever
his version over chalte chalte’s teary version
.
when i am in sad mood
i prefer listening to ’shayad main jindgi ki sahar’ by jagjeet
than reading a para from ‘tractus logico philosophicus’
.
while watching bed and bored you will be thinking about what is going on
while watching chalte chalte you will be feeling what is going on
.
i prefer feeling over thinking
.
and sukhvinder’s rendering help me to connect and feel
.
if i am to think than i would rather read a book
because that gives me space to think
.
i am not in cinema hall to think
i am there to fell
.
i leave my brain behind for sure
.
because my brain is not that little
that a film can make me think
if a film can make me think
i definitely am not very high on the intelligence level
.
if a wednesday is needed to make me think about terrorism
i am almost as well dumb
.
yes it could be good for those who will not think if not for a wednesday
.
but to accept that i am so self absorbed that unless i saw a film on terrorism
i am not concerened about it
will hurt my intellectual vanity
.
i deem myself as a fairly intelligent human being
and for this reason i don’t need a movie to make me aware about the issues
.
and if i need a movie to make me aware about the issues
what worth my awareness is
if we contiue with this logic
.
than what a movie should aspire for
.
if a wednesday is directed towards make me aware that there is terrorism
its not doing anything more than a newspaper
.
what could be the genuine contribution of cinema than ?
.
i think
a movie on terrorism should aspire to make me feel the impact of terrorism
which a news can not do
.
when i read in newspaper about people dying
its a thought
and by its nature thoughts does not go very deep
what does go deep is feeling
feeling is deeper than thinking
.
a movie on terrorism should aiming to make me feel the impact
the loss of human life
the feeling that only an image is capable to create
words in a newspaper can not do that
.
if a movie is about an issue it should offer something beyond newspaper
and that something is feeling not thinking
sukhvinder
.
i am certain
that bed and bored must have background music
.
what is the purpose of this background music
to enhance the mood of the scene
if scene is of sorrow
background music will not be of hip-hop
it will be corresponding to the scene
and will be a sad intrumental piece
.
you don’t have problem with that
as music being used to enhance the scene
.
your problem seems with the human voice
which is typical bollywood trait
.
but
if an instrumental piece of music is ok
what is wrong with human voice
i think it is more apt, as a music piece with human voice will do more to enhance a scene than a simple instrumental piece
i just remember a great example for this
.
in movie ‘the last temptation of christ’
.
scene is of christ carrying his cross to the hill
.
martin scorsese has used the soul stiring alaap of ustad nusrat fateh ali khan in this scene
.
only bollywood will not be so stingy
it will use a full blown musical number instead
nice stuff you have come up with!
when a man is happy there is dance in him
even those who can not dance, tap
when someone is happy he will play some dancing number and stir
.
happiness is manifested in dancing
.
now for a bollywood movie
scene is off a wedding
and everybody is happy
.
how to show this happiness
no matter how much great acting is on display
.
ek fadkata gaana daal do
director happy, producer happy, janta happy
sab khus
.
nagada nagada nagada baja
.
imagine a wedding procession
some boys are dancing
those who are standing around will be pulled and pushed to dance
you are happy let it flow
.
its not the contrary
that those who are not dancing would stop the dancers
.
you can find this kind of people only in the critics of song and dance in bollywood
they are the kind of people who will say that why this frenzy
stop this dancing
.
such a heavy price for appearing developed
at least i am not ready to pay it
bajao re
hey vishrant, i am on no side on intellectual undrestanding. i was only commenting on how cinema is perceived today as either art or entertainment..and my underlying plea is that such segregations should be questioned..i do not prefer trufaaut’s version which is why i have made another plea saying that our formulas should not be written off..we should understand that they are rooted in our psyche..people i meet are often blaming bollywood formulas for the decline of cinema..im just trying to say that formulas may need to be reimagined but not necessarily done away with..before aping the west we need to understand that faith is ingrained in india..like the sanctity of certain institutions like marriage..criticising bollywood and wishing we had invented noir or french new wave is an elitist and futile activity..working around the formulas we have can lead to more productivity..thank you for reading. im sorry i cdnt make my points more clearly.
existentialism
.
existemtialism satre ke saath mar gaya
europe main bhi log bhool gaye per yahan abhi tak ghaseet rahe hain
.
yaha pfc main kafka ka naam aise lete hain jaise atom bom fod diya ho, ab aur kuch kahne sunne ki jaroorat nahien
.
existentialism
denies any thing non apparent
life is that is apparent
all of life is that is visible
.
in other words this worldly life is all
.
with this assumption existentialism end up with the conclusion that there is no meaning in anything
you live and one day you will die
and all is gone
your good deeds, your bad deeds, everything
one a person is gone, nothing is left
so whatever you do is ultimately meaningless
life as such is meaningless
.
camu begins one of his book with ‘ suicide is the only philosophical problem’
.
the life that appears is meaningless
there is no point in going on living
and western philosophy is stuck there
.
here enters the eastern philosophy
the solution eastern philosophy offers is
that this is not all of life
there is so much more to life than that is apparent
.
search for it and you will find it
.
so when a man in india is disillusioned with this life
there is a solution for him
solution is to search for some bigger life
.
a satre is there where arjun was, where buddha was
utterly disillusionised with this life
but arjun and buddha was in india
where it is in the air that this life is not all of it
.
actually
indian air is that
live this life
and when you are finished with it
take sannayass
.
east gives the solution to disillusioned
sannayyas
west give the solution
suicide
.
let me tell you
not many people are going to commit suicide
and the atmosphere in west is same, what was in east when buddha was born, of affluence
may be next buddha will be coming from west
.
because whole western society is knocking at the door of spirituality
they are in the situation when inner journey begins
once that door is broken
there is going to be a flood
.
and people from here
jo abhi bhi existentialism main lot rahe hain
west jaayenge meditation seekhne
well argued piece…I haven’t watched many french movies (truffaunt only one) but I have found the experience very bland compared to other world cinema…
…with the exception of Amelie…
conventional indian wisdom says that
at the top rung of the understanding is – a mystic
.
seek a mystic
Nice piece.
thanks.
Dazed,amelie director audrey tautou also made a very long engagement..thats also rich in high pitched emotion..but otherwise the french do tend to be extremely understated about emotion, if not altogether existentialist..
great post!
pragya, audrey tautou acted in “a very long engagement”
both “a very long engagement” and “amelie” was directed by Jean-Pierre Jeunet
btw nice article.
rick, sorry about the slip up.but french names! and thanks for reading
just to conclude about existentialism
.
all the sutras in india begin with ‘now’
.
patanjali begin his yoga sutra ‘ ath-yoga-nushasanam’
now the discipline of yoga
.
narad begin his bhakti sutra ‘athato-bhkati-jigyasa’
now the inquiry into love
.
badrayan begin his bramha sutra ‘athato-bramha-jigyasa’
now the inquiry into ultimate
.
this ‘now’ indicates at the extensialism
‘now’ is when you are done with this apparent life
‘now’ you are ready to look for something more
.
this ‘now’ is for jean paul satre
and
only when someone is in the situation of jean paul satre
these sutras become meaningful
to understand this sutras you need to be an existentialist to the core
.
unless you are at the end of one rope
the next begining could not be meaningful
.
that’s why whole of india has been reading gita for ages
and not a single other ‘Arjun’ is born
.
because ‘gita’ is not important
your being in the state of Arjun is important
.
one more difference is of knowing and being
.
when you want to know more and more
philosophy is the answer
.
than comes a point of saturation of knowing
when you can see that this knowing is not of any worth
you are still same miserable yourself
and let me say that you can not even comprehend the sadness of satre, let alone empathize with it
.
‘now’ at this point the paradigm shift takes place
when
you don’t want to know more
you want to ‘be’ more
.
and when you want to ‘be’ more
spirituality is the answer
again a new thought
.
don’t think spirituality is all about gods
.
in patanjali yoga sutra the word ‘god’ is not mentioned
.
patanjali is a scientinst
.
he don’t ask you to believe in something
.
he simply gives you methods
.
do it
and you will get the result
.
no faith, no belief is required
you just should be ready to experiment
When do we get to see your in-depth interview with India’s best documentary film-makers ???
ramu sir! haha oho did u read my post actually? i wanted to start with ajay tg’s exclusive tell all interview for pfc. have been trying for over a month now, but there are a whole host of issues..his dad was hospitalised, then his comp crashed, then he set out to cover the polling..there are language issues as well..but hes very sweet and cooperative and hopefully we shd have something in place just for pfc very soon.watch this space:)