My Mirror column (14 Jun 2020):
Has Indian cinema gained or lost something as filmmakers become increasingly distanced from the village?
It is hard to disagree with the fact that even the alternative, non-Bollywood cinema of the last decade is almost entirely urban. There are rare exceptions, but they prove the rule, like a Peepli Live (2010), where the village's desperation for visibility is tied to its appearance on screen -- but as the locale for a media circus. For a more recent film set entirely in a North Indian village, I can only think of Gamak Ghar – which proves the point, too, because it is the young urban filmmaker memorialising the village his parents left behind. Our films may be further from the feudal than they once were, but it looks like they are also further from the rural.
Published in Mumbai Mirror, 14 Jun 2020.
Has Indian cinema gained or lost something as filmmakers become increasingly distanced from the village?
Recently, while on a video call with a novelist friend, I mentioned writing a series of
columns on Indian films about the migrant experience, including
Muzaffar Ali's Gaman (1978), in which Farooque Shaikh played a young
man who has to leave his Uttar Pradesh village to become a taxi
driver in what was then Bombay. “Gaman is a good film,” conceded
my friend, a less forgiving film viewer than me. “But
it presented the local raja as this very nice man, and then I
realized the filmmaker is talking about himself!” I said, well, it
was the 1970s, so more likely a fictionalisation
of the filmmaker's father – one degree of
separation. And my friend and I laughed.
But it is indeed true that the village
in which the film is shot was (and was shown to be) Kotwara, District
Kheri, UP – the place that Muzaffar Ali's ancestors have ruled for
generations. So when Farooque Shaikh's on-screen mother tells her
on-screen daughter-in-law Smita Patil that “Raja Sahab vilayat
jaane se pehle gale lagaaein aur kahein, 'Aap mere bade bhai hain',”
that expansive gesture of personalised generosity was how the film
chose to characterise the area's ruling feudal family – the family
to which the filmmaker himself belonged. The straitened circumstances
of the Farooque Shaikh character, meanwhile, were blamed on an upper
caste landlord who had established himself as a middleman.
Why does any of this matter? Well, it
matters because Gaman is one of the rare films made in India
to deal sensitively with the pressures of migration; to depict the
way large swathes of rural India have become unsustainable for their
inhabitants, pushing people out into our cities, where they must then
live depleted lives in crowded, often forcibly unsanitary
circumstances, away from loved ones – until that life, too, is made
unsustainable by an unprecedented state-created crisis like the
Covid-19 lockdown. Beginning with an ethnographic eye – the women
and children of the village, sitting silent and watchful, overlaid
with Hira Devi Mishra's unforgettable rendition of Ras Ke Bhare Tore
Nain, or a little later, what looks like wonderful documentary
footage of the local Muharram celebrations, Gaman used
a more mainstream fictional narrative – including some very fine
songs -- to get its viewers to feel for the poor rural
migrant.
So it seemed important that Gaman's
creator came from the top of that rural hierarchy. It was Muzaffar
Ali's feudal background that actually connected him with the village
– and later took him back there to found a designer clothing line
that employs local artisans. Ali was never going to be a poor villager,
but he had clearly met several, and was able to generate the creative
compassion needed to tell their story. Once I started to think about
it, all the films I'd been writing about these past few weeks felt
like they needed to be seen again through the lens – pardon the pun
-- of their creators.
Three and a half decades before Gaman,
the migrant's story had been told in Bimal Roy's classic Do Bigha
Zamin, which drew on a Tagore poem about a dispossessed peasant to
create a film with a strongly socialist IPTA-inspired worldview,
including a joyful immersion in India's folk traditions of music and
dance. The callous zamindar who drives Do Bigha Zamin's peasant
protagonist Shambhu to ruin was, of course, among many such
villainous depictions of the time, including Pran as the lecherous,
drunken Ugranarayan in Roy's own beautifully rendered supernatural
romance, Madhumati. Was it of consequence that Bimal Roy came from a
landowning family in Suapur, in former East Bengal? Was Ugranarayan
informed, as Roy's daughter Rinki Roy Bhattacharya has suggested, by
Roy's real-life uncle Jogeshchandra, whose indolent feudal lifestyle
the lifelong teetotaller Roy clearly wished to keep at bay?
Such biographical questions may seem
altogether too specific, and given our paucity of personal archives,
necessarily speculative. But what I'm trying to get at is the fact
that there was, in both theses cases, a connection with the village
that allowed for the rural character to emerge on screen. Balraj
Sahni, who played the peasant-turned-rickshawalla in DBZ, was so
aware of his being urban that he spent a lot of time with a
rickshawala who was a migrant. But when one actually reads about
Sahni's life -- for instance, the Communist leader PC Joshi describing
how Sahni's parents insisted on keeping a buffalo for fresh milk in their house in 1950s Bombay -- one realises that the connections between the
urban and the rural in that India were still stronger than we can
dream of.
In a book of interviews called
Rendezvous With Hindi Cinema (2019), the director Dibakar
Banerjee makes the point sharply. “Earlier, there was some kind of
a connection. It's a paradox, that connect was feudalism. Feudal
families would send their children to study in colleges in Bombay or
Delhi. But they'd go back for vacation and see the real, poor, feudal
India, where they would be the lords,” he says, speculating for
instance about the powerfully anti-feudal films of Shyam Benegal.
“But the present generation of filmmakers is even more cut off from
rural India, poor India,” Banerjee says.
It is hard to disagree with the fact that even the alternative, non-Bollywood cinema of the last decade is almost entirely urban. There are rare exceptions, but they prove the rule, like a Peepli Live (2010), where the village's desperation for visibility is tied to its appearance on screen -- but as the locale for a media circus. For a more recent film set entirely in a North Indian village, I can only think of Gamak Ghar – which proves the point, too, because it is the young urban filmmaker memorialising the village his parents left behind. Our films may be further from the feudal than they once were, but it looks like they are also further from the rural.
Published in Mumbai Mirror, 14 Jun 2020.
No comments:
Post a Comment