still relevant shyam benegal
few years ago i interviewed shyam bengal.i think his views are relevant and will be enlightenig reading for PFC readers.
How do you analyse the emergence of Indian cinema? Do you feel any challenge in the present context?
The problem is not that there is no challenge. The real problem is that when the cinema started as a 20th century art, about 100 years ago, it came on its own. So forth not only the film artists including all the technicians considered film as the forefront of new artistic versatility but that included the whole genre of artistes- painter, sculptors, theatre people, architect…That went beyond the art of all the art form. But by the middle of 20th century another medium came up-TV. Although for India it came just 35 years ago it came so swiftly that in last fifteen years we have more channels than any other country has. Beside USA non-other country has as much channels as we have. So with this new wave a lot that was done by cinema moved to TV. And TV as a medium has now become something that people think both negatively and positively. But with advent of TV, cinema stabalized as theatre had been. It grew in different way because of ever escalating cost of production. The markebility of a film became crucial factor. You cannot make a film now, like you made 20 years ago because the artistic endeavour has become industrial endeavour. Earlier you used the medium to delineate your artistic expressions but now that is not the primary factor. You are forced to think how much market your film is going to capture. And that has greater influence on the kind of film you make. With the industrialization of the medium, cinema has become a commodity and not a vehicle of self-expression. It has become a commodity to be sold and consumed. Since the commercialization has taken over, and to which you have no control, this has posed a greater threat for the Indian filmmakers.
On one side, since the forces of the market will determine whether a film can be made or cannot be made and individual decision no longer play such an importamt part, you have to assess whether the subject is capable of reaching to the largest number of people or not. And when you do that you make the creative people irrelevent who consider cinema as a means of creative expression. Since this is part of the process, you cannot help creative people go on diminising. But for these people the need to express them continues to be there. It is natural for human being to be creative. When you block one way the other way must be explored. It may find expression to TV through video, as a new means to assess the market.
A new kind of cinema can also be there?
Yes, a new kind of cinema.. but a new way to reach the audience. There is one thing that has not happened in India. We always think about of majority audience and have never thought of minority audience. India has a population of 900 million people. 250 million people are middle class (urban population). Among this middle class 30 to 40 million are t t means by which we can reach this audience. Just think that nearly 900 films are made every year but we make nothing for these 3 to 4 crore audience. This poses a serious problem. We make nothing for those who are in intellectual profession: Educationist, academicians, doctors, lawyers and executives who do mental work. There is nothing for their entertainment. We have marginalized them totally. This is the major problem! America and Western Europe has Art cinema. In India we have that kind of place only in Calcutta but not in Mumbai or Delhi. There are people who want to make these kinds of films but they are financially not in a position to do so. Finance is the major problem. But that will change because the need of creative self-expression remains intact.
What is the role of NFDC?
What role NFDC can play? I do not like the way people have defined liberalization in India. The current definition suggests that you have a place only if you can buy or sell a thing. Market has become the driving force, which is not good. Still we need time. We need time to understand. Only market driven force cannot determine what is good and what is not good. Government cannot play a part in this, because the Govt. also does not know what is good and what is not good.
Recently few films have done good business and it has been said that this is a new trend in the film industry.
This is a trend inspired by ‘feel-good’ cinema. It started from Hollywood with the support of affluent audience and now it has come to India. If you categorize and analyse these cinema you will find that these ‘feel-good’ cinema is popular in Metro cities and among NRIs. Actually patronizers of these cinemas are more orthodox. They like to see traditional and ritual customs of their culture and portray them as their value system. I donot know of which film you are talking about! If you want to give reference of any of these film than I would ask you one question whether these films have social relevance in the future. A good film must transcend the time. If success and popularity of any film is limited to a certain time frame than it is an average film. All these film will have the same end.
Now many of your contemporaries are experimenting in commercial set-up with rare success. How do you react to these experimentations?
There is nothing bad in doing so. If they become victim of commercial set-up than a question can be raised. But if they are working in the commercial set-up and keeping their terms intact, it is good. I am afraid of one thing and it has very strong base. Sometimes your chosen format influences the subject of your film. It has greater influence on what you say and that changes the meaning completely. I do not wish this to happen.
What is your view of popular and so called commercial cinema?
Popularity means opinion of the street. Take it in this way; public likes songs and dances like cholee ke peeche kya hai. This in no way means that it is also good for them! If you show blue films to the public, in the open market, they will watch it leaving their work! But does that means you are going to show such things? What do you mean by popular opinion? If you go beyond your social and cultural ethos, and even if the market likes that you have to use your mind.
Then there must be censorship. But you are against censorship?
Why I am against the censorship is because the way it has been designed. It is unworkable. Since 1913 there has been nearly 35000 films made, and out of that, to my opinion, 10,000 are supposed to be banned. Have they been able to do it? Censor board exists since that time. There is basic fault in the way it has been designed. How can I say that particular thing is not good for you? This is the non-sense of censorship. What I can do is that I can create an education system that goes with the ethos. I should be able to judge by myself whether I want to be affected or influenced by this film or not.
It is a learning process. It is the study that will create an atmosphere in which you will be guided, that certain things will influence you and certain things will not influence you. People get influenced only because they are ignorant and they are not properly educated. They look at films in a style of fashion.
What will be the role of cinema in future?
People have stopped being challenged. Even if you take case of TV, it has stopped socialization. When you did not have TV you used to do a lot many things to stimulate your brain- reading, listening to music, talking, going for films and many more. Suddenly you donot know what to do. The film has also reduced to that level. But this is just a matter of time. It will change because there will a demand from 3 to4 crore people in our country. They will say that they are sorry, they do not want this! People go to see films because they are not left with choice. On the other hand financial system is such that we are unable to offer them a choice. It is like people wish to read while travelling in train but they are restricted by the choice of the bookshop at the raiway station.
Donot you think we are living in a decadent society where old human values and ethics have been overshadowed by consumerism?
Total value system has lost. We are not adding anything to the society. A good society is one where you expect by human being to add value in society to what they do. When a carpenter makes a chair out of wood, he adds value to that piece of wood. But when you simply buy and sale things you do not add anything. Money has become the most important thing for the coming generation because we have taught them that. But money doesnot adds value to your society, your history and to your culture. The disturbing trend is this where our society has created Harshad Mehta a hero: A hero because he has made so much money. This is not a good society. In Japan a good artist is called a national treasure. The problem is that we have not yet thought of creating a good society. hose for whose interest we have done nothing. And there is no seResponsibility of the state is that every child should be educated. But what we spend on education? There is total waste of human resources.
How do you see yourself as a filmmaker?
Very challenging. Challenges have not yet stoped. There still exist problem of getting finance for your new film. I know that this totally commercialized cinema industry does not like the kind of film I make. They do not even support this kind of cinema.
You have spent more than 30 years in making certain kind of films. Donot you consider yourself as pioneer of such films?
I donot believe in these kind of adjectives. There were many filmmakers who came along with me and all of them have done good work. Since personally we were on search of a kind of films away from the commercial cinema we were one one side. Neither I was leader of this group nor the mentor of anybody. Everybody contributed a lot in the form of alternative cinema. We all are equal. We worked together.
What is the future of your kind of films in the present scenario?
You experience the same kind of situation in your life also. Certain things are not in the main stream. You leave them on the edge. When you are on the borderline people cannot see you and than you are thought that you have vanished. Meaningful films are still being made but since they are on the borderline they are not being seen. Infact audiences’ taste has also changed. Life has become ‘populist’. Total value system has become populist. In todays scenario being an art film maker indicates that you do not understand the commercial aspect of filmmaking. Since you lack the commercial aspect your films have no value.
How this situation will change?
This will continue till its energy is exausted. Since it doesnot have depth it will exaust someday.
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
it is very nice Ajay to read the interview again.
things ate changing very fast.
now we have net.
you may not find space in a main strem nes paper but can write here.
i think www.youtube.com has many short films and one can go on seeing a very different kind of work.
keep writing
seems interview is of that time when our population was 900 million and one film made for a million. ajay ji this interview is truly relevant and very basic. When shyam benegal talks about the challenge and current scenario, it is very true that, immediate forces drive our society; cinemas are often made to buy luxury flats sea facing window, to get no. of blind followers and not beyond. Besides, makers get excuse of being helpless they are not been challenged since this is the familiar case with everybody in any profession. A film such as
Ajay, this is a wonderful interview. It is interesting to see his approach is not so much “rage against the machine”, but one that is more accepting of realities.
To me, the reality is that there will always be a market for many kinds of film – the populist ones that most people on PFC hate and the more niche films. The key is just realizing that a small target in India is not that small in absolute numbers.
So, one market never needs to crush the other. They co-exist very nicely.
Thanks for sharing.