Cinema
plays an archetypal part in the daily life of an ordinary human being. Film as
a multi-dimensional medium, with great potential to inform and educate has
extensive power to play with a man’s psychology. Being the cultural artifact of
human life, it has carved a niche of its own by depicting the eternal verities
which are universal in nature. It has become the rich heritage of man and we
see the recordation of the heart- beats of the entire human race in celluloid
form. How do we articulate a modern being which creates a world beyond us and
opens a world for us? The very query points us to cinema, a medium that is
never static. It is constantly in motion and not at all in an inertia. Cinema
always has the caliber to create alternatives and space just like the montage
juxtaposing the plurality of voices, space, images and time. It can generate
new and continuous dialogues not only between people, but also between history,
past and future. We can look at this line of time. Our tail is bloody and we have a head that
will eat up whatever needs to be eaten up to avenge the wounds of history. Head will devour its own tail in course of
time. It will be encountered in the very near future. Between the head and tail
lies our present. Cinema has the
charisma to present all these possibilities. Film makers will bestow another
space, dialogue, time and it will give you another future as well as many
futures. Cinema is thriving in an air circumscribed in the heated discussions
on freedom of expression, censorship, political interference and art house
cinema. Taking this discourse ahead was the seminar entitled ‘P.K.Nair
Colloquium: Tradition of Dissent’ held at Hotel Hycinth as a part of the 22nd
edition of the International Film Festival of Kerala. This annual colloquium
dedicated to late Paramesh Krishnan Nair, the grand old man of film archiving
in India had an astounding panel of writer N.S.Madhavan, the acclaimed writer
of contemporary Malayalam literature, Amrit Gangar, film scholar and historian,
Anup Singh, film maker, Alencier Lay Lopez, Malayalam actor, Sadanand Menon,
Indian arts editor. Bina Paul, Kerala State Chalachitra Academy vice
chairperson welcomed the gathering and the session was moderated by professor
Dr.Veena Hariharan.
Amrit
Gangar created the aura of the colloquium by speaking of the voices of dissent
and the remarkable contributions of P.K.Nair to Indian cinema. P.K. Nair would
always lament in his deep archival mode- negative in the time of celluloid was
a crucial factor. A factor bestowed upon it by the late 19th and 20th
centuries. It was responsible for producing a positive; a positive of image and
sound, a positive of polyphony and of enduring thoughts. It was in the negative
like silver lining that Nair’s lamentation has become an illumination. At this
moment, this negative is turning into a metaphor; a moment of dissent. This
moment of dissent is a part of our grand tradition of positive. A positive of
plurality, a positive of multiple resonances, a positive of patience where
thousand flowers bloom. A positive of parampara
to survive the centuries of samaya, the mahakaal.
We have to understand how forms of art in themselves become means to
dissent. Political dissent is the only notion that is widely discussed or
pondered over these days. We have huge traditions of dissent which is often
ignored or which can be used. Dissent has become either so suppressed or brash.
Most women of our epics are the voices of dissent either feeble or forceful.
The voices of Sita and Draupudi, Ahalya and Rukmini are still heard. Surpanaka and Shambuka had their own voices
of dissent. Buddha did dissent, Mahavira did dissent and so did Charvaka.
Tukaram was a great dissenter. His albums were voices of protest against power
and oppression of the poor. Bhakti
movement was a part of the great tradition of dissent. If religion is the opium
of the masses, it is the sigh of the sufferers also. It is the sigh that
history keeps reminding especially the middle classes over time. The voices of
dissent also build the wailing walls of our times. At this juncture, the
ironical sounds of history reckon to save Hinduism. Amrit Gangar exhorted the
progressives and Marxists to save Hinduism. “From turning into an instrument of
repression and killing, we have to save saffron, the colour of emancipation and
giving for the progress. Th very colour of the fakir has to be reclaimed from
the oppressors. It is for the progressives to save the saffron colour of
deliverance”, added Gangar. It is the irony of history that pleads the
multitudes for a reinvention with the multifarious nature of dharma. Here comes
the question of dharma which is not an equivalent of the English word religion.
“Yada
yada hi dharmasya glanirbhavati bharata
Abhythanamadharmasya
tadatmanam srijamyaham
Paritranaya
sadhunang vinashay cha dushkritam
Dharmasangsthapanarthay
sambhabami yuge yuge”
(Whenever
there is decay of righteousness, O Bharata,
And there is exaltation of unrighteousness,
then I Myself come forth;
For the protection of the good, for the
destruction of evil-doers,
For the sake of firmly establishing
righteousness, I am born from age to age.)
In
this stream of consciousness are born, Kanhaiya Kumar and Jignesh Mevani. To
kill one Gouri Lankesh and more Gauris will be born. When Safdar Hashmi is
killed, more and more Safdar Hashmi’s will be taking birth. A valiant voice against repression and
oppression is the voice of the universe. Amrit Gangar has been right in stating
that we have transcended the boundaries of a nation as well as nationalism.
“Silence
is the most viable option when it comes to resistance”, opines eminent writer
N.S.Madhavan. Citizens in the garb of supporters are muddling up the art of
articulation. Dissent is an art whereas art is not a medium to dissent. To pursue one’s own vocation of art may not
be possible all the times. The idea of dissent is inbuilt into art. Dissent in
actual political situation for an artist is challenging. Many artists did react
to the oppressor’s situation when art was denied.
M.F.
Hussian remains as an excellent testimony as his portrait of Indira Gandhi in
Silk sari pointed figures of suspicion at him. Silence is a better option than
support and many writers have materialized that. Mulk Raj Anand, the renowned
Indian writer opted silence throughout in many disparaging circumstances of Emergency.
An array of artists incorporating Phanishwar Nath Renu, Shivaram Karanth, and
Satyavrat Sinha embody the dichotomy of silence and violence at the times of
oppression. Allegory is the medium available for dissent during the times of
protest. Poems by Malayalam writers Sachithanandan, Ayyappa Panicker, Kadammanitta
Ramakrishnan and the short stories of Kakkanadan are single solitary instances
of protest. Hence, it is impossible to think that we are not allowed to protest
in times of coercion. Silence acts a healthier choice than joining the madding
crowds of protest.
Moving on to the medium of cinema, Madhavan
emphasized that it is a matter of pride and prestige that the biggest protest
during Emergency emanated from cinema. One artist who really stood against the
emergency of India and its paroxysms was Kishore Kumar. He refused to sing in
the All India Congress Committee meeting and he was banned from AIR then. His
fully completed movie ‘Kissa Kursi’ was ruined during the risks and pains of
emergency. But Kishore Kumar still lives on and no age, no custom can wither
the immortal variety made immortal by his creative vibrancy.
“The
time to dissent is now” added Madhavan. He mentioned the role of archiving to
keep the memories afresh forever and the need to preserve the pristine negative
in the archive of history.
Anup
Singh began his deliberation with the notability of hope in the practice of
dissent. The first thing that comes to his mind when he thinks about the
process of film making is the frame. He looks at the frame as it holds within it
a space and time. This is the primary thing that strikes him. “As far as I am
concerned, this space and time is very resonant because everything in cinema is
within the space and time that the frame is holding. It is pivotal that what
kind of frame we create”, says Anup Singh. Cinema allows the frame a constant
transition. In cinema, the frame is never static. Everything that befalls
within the frame changes the frame. It renders a new value and new quality life
to it. We have a present that is strange and a past that is bloody. We will
avenge it and redeem it by creating the time.
“The
process of politics of today has given us a tremendously powerful frame which
has somehow squeezed the space and time. We are left in fact with a frame that
is not moving anymore. It has taken control over time and space. I am amused in
many ways”, added Singh.
Film
makers know the ways and means to tackle this hurdle. They are not helpless as
film makers. They have a commanding art,
a tool to combat the kind of control of the time and space. In a way, film is
mirroring the common man of flesh and blood like us. Singh holds the view that
each of us are endowed a certain moment on the mighty planet of Earth. We have a firm time and space to make
ourselves responsible and celebrative of the gift of life we have been
bestowed.
Alencier
Lay Lopez feels ecstatic that he is born in the very land that gave birth to
legendary cum mythological figure Naranath Bhranthan. His job goes coterminous
with the job of Bhranthan. All day, he would
roll a huge boulder to the top of a hill and when the sun hit the horizon, he
would roll the boulder down from atop the hill, clapping his hands and laughing
derisively. It was clearly a dig at the materialistic society that has lost
sight of the ultimate goal, He does his job and so does the actor
Alencier.
“I
am an actor and my medium of expression is my body. I earnestly believe that
drama is my medium and passion. It is my way to protest also” says Alencier. He
has some responsibilities to the society as an actor and a human being. Albeit
he has become a star and part of the commercial industry recently, he
ascertains that he is a star from the streets. “I am basically an actor. This
is what I am and I will always be” opined the actor who doesn’t wish to create
a frame to expose his stardom. He regrets that the stars are still afraid to
speak out against the injustice that is rampant in the world.
The
world we dwell is a world of intolerance. The dire need of the hour is to speak
out not silently and subtly but loudly and clearly. Here comes the application
of body. By opening the biosphere beyond body, it becomes more free and
unrestricted. Hence the body fashions its own space.
“The
act of dissent should be an act registered as dissent. This natural act of
human expression is to reveal the oppression than being on the side of the
oppressor”, opines Sadanand Menon. The space of dissent which we need to own is
not necessarily owned. The concept of dissent has to be nuanced. Dissent, a
political act with art is an immediate impulse that comes from social and
historical contexts. All sorts of people in the creative community comprising
poets, artists, film makers, musicians, theatre workers are ensnared in the
debate, the conflict of unequal power, control, dominance and hierarchy.
Literary, artistic and social production that emerge contribute to this
skirmish. During the moments of intense political eruption, artistic outputs
can make the context of conflict look normal. A set of artists and public intellectuals
try to expose this struggle. There are ample number of moments in history where
people have spoken out with a voice that has come to the limelight. Many
artists endorse invisible tactic where as many expose the tyranny. The language
of cinema through frame, duration, pace of camera, gesture of an actor exposes
the oppressive nature of social structure we are facing day by day.
Amrit Gangar pointed out the role of education
in silencing the voices. Management education since its inception with the
mantra ‘no lunch is free’ has killed the concept of dissent. He expounded this with
a management question who the best salesman is. The answer may sound
preposterous as the best salesman is the one who can sell comb to a baldy man.
The youngsters are put themselves in tune with the music of existing education
to surreptitiously follow these sorts of answers without raising a question or
hint of doubt. Education not only makes the students follow this system blindly
but also impose silence thereby killing the thinking ability. Mass media which
started dominating the new generation has removed the cinema consciousness. The
discipline of humanities is gradually getting erased from the academia.
Humanities that nurtures the faculties of mind is not seen or acknowledged in
the present era of scientific and technological advancements. Film makers of
today are from advertising field and precarious to anticipate whether there
will be visionaries like Ritwik Ghatak, John Abraham and G. Aravindan in cinema
today or the days to come. It is time to question the education we attain and
start dissenting. The time to dissent is now. The oft quoted adage ‘better late
than never’ exemplifies the need to dissent. It is better to protest than to
regret later. Cinema acts as an influential weapon to question and answer. The
Canadian poet Leonard Cohen’s Anthem bestows a note of optimism.
“There is a crack, a crack in
everything
That’s how the light gets in”.
This
crack or little opening must be wholly pressed into action. Let this anthem
glimmer hope to the humanity to create minds without the fear of expression.
