The bard of unsettling songs
RATNA PATHAK SHAH
WHEN Anand PatwardhanÕs first film, Waves of Revolution,
(about the rising tide of opposition to the Emergency) came out in 1974, Prabit
Dasmahapatra said, ÔIn India ... political consciousness is a rare thing among
our filmmakers; in this context he is both a new name and a new trend in Indian
film.Õ Anand has, over the past forty years, never lost sight of this
consciousness; if anything, his political understanding has deepened and become
sharper. He has chosen to make documentaries, he has funded himself, and has
picked his subjects pursuing only his own conscience.
Many Ôsocially
awareÕ film-makers of his generation in India succumbed to the lure of power
and popularity, but he has unwaveringly trod the path he chose for himself. In
doing so he has taken the documentary genre out of the clutches of the
officialdom of the Films Division type and shown the way to other filmmakers to
harness the great potential of the form. If documentary films in India today
are a vibrant, potent and highly diverse force, Anand is in no small measure
responsible for it. A pioneer who has continued to think of himself as a
student for over forty years.
ÔItÕs almost
four hours long and they havenÕt even started yet,Õ whispers someone.
ÔWeÕll take
breaks IÕm sure,Õ comes the reply from another of a small group gathered to
watch Anand PatwardhanÕs Vivek/Reason at a private screening, which is
running behind time.
ThereÕs always a
little trepidation about watching his films; one is certain they will make you
uncomfortable and they are likely to be long and yet one is curious to see how
he has strung his ideas together and who heÕs going to ÔoffendÕ this time. This
screening too follows a pattern; the setting up of projector, screen, laptop;
sound is always a delicate matter requiring much backing and forthing; the
audience is getting restive – when will this begin? IÕve been to several
of these screenings in college halls, community centres, small auditoria and I
remember getting extremely worried about the many seemingly insurmountable
complications and also the ever-present threat of some offended group crawling
out of the woodwork.
Unfazed in the
midst of this is Anand; he knows the screening will happen and everyone will be
held by what he has to say. This is the confidence that permeates all his
films, that here is something he has to say after thinking deeply about it and
that he knows how to say it effectively and that there are people who will want
to hear it.
Fearlessness is a thread that runs through
his work. He is always in the thick of things while covering an event as he
shoots almost all his films himself; he drags us into the situation along with
him and we see the real faces and stories behind media reports. In Hamara
Shahar/Bombay, Our City (1985) we are brought face to face both with
the people whose houses have been demolished and those who ordered the
demolition; weÕre also made uncomfortably aware of the antipathy and ignorant
heartlessness of Ôpeople like usÕ who look away from such concerns. I remember
the debates around the film with some groups sometimes embarrassedly, sometimes
arrogantly defending highly untenable positions when confronted by the inequities
the film demands that we acknowledge. At the same time his camera unflinching
records the women who lambast his privilege of photographing their misery but
doing nothing to alleviate it. He takes the accusation on the chin and we are
left with no alternative but to recognize our own complicity.
Patwardhan is
also not afraid of wandering away from the thrust of the ÔstoryÕ and chasing
another that leads from it. To me this is very much part of our Indian artistic
tradition where ideas unfold and give birth to other conundrums and those lead
on to unexpected but related stories, until finally everything comes together
to leave a deep mark on the viewer. It is because of this non-linear movement
that AnandÕs films become con-versations between the filmmaker
and his subjects and between the viewer and her world view; these conversations
persist in ones thoughts long after the film is done. ÔPatwardhan never
preaches; he simply shows things the way they are and letÕs his audience
decide,Õ says Blair B. Kling of the University of Illinois.
Fortunately, he
thinks of himself as a storyteller first, using images and sound to speak to us
in different ways from the words he employs. His latest film, Vivek /Reason
opens with the ominous sound of a Bullet motorcycle as headlights come at the
camera through the dark. ItÕs a dramatic beginning and the sense of dreadful
anticipation that settles over us could well signify a dark Netflix thriller,
but this isnÕt staged; itÕs really happening. Anand puts us right in the middle
of the mess that is India as it teeters on the very edge of madness.
The film unfolds like a thriller but what he
compels you to look at is yourself – and people you know – and what
you see is not pretty. The motorcycle appears again in the film, each time
carrying the message of ominous happenings; each time you brace yourself for
the ugliness that is to come and wonder how we let our society come to this
pass. The film has penetrated oneÕs heart and mind and will not allow us to
slip back into numb ignorance. I have sometimes wondered why Anand has never
made a fictional film but having recently revisited some of his films, I
realize he has no need to; he uses the drama of real life, always much more
potent and convincing than any that imagination can produce.
The greater achievement is that the
techniques he employs to make his point are never manipulative; they emerge
organically from the argument that he is laying out and that he is in no mood
to guide towards a predetermined conclusion. He is always the patient listener
off camera, asking questions that force even an angry communalist to exercise
some form of reason. HeÕs at his best in War and Peace/Jung aur Aman, 2002,
talking to young Pakistani schoolgirls and drawing a well reasoned and most
hopeful message from that encounter – that peace between warring peoples
is possible. But it is when he puts us in the proximity of the Hindu right and
lets us see those hate-filled faces and hear their passionate but disturbingly
distorted ideas that we feel the chill of real horror that no fiction can
produce.
Through it all,
AnandÕs is the voice that is engaging with the ugliness, not manipulating it
into revealing itself but rather trying to understand the fount from which it
emanates, not even stopping to register the danger that he himself is in when a
Hindutva ÔfirebrandÕ offers to do away with him in a public meeting. We see
Anand in the same room and our blood runs cold at the possibility of what could
happen next, but Anand lets them know he is there and is willing to debate with
them. As the incensed right-winger backs down somewhat, Anand has shown us the
nature and the inherent weakness of bullies and that it is possible for an
individual to counter them; for a moment Reason seems to have an upper hand and
I, the viewer, feel empowered and liberated.
ÔIt is not
hatred towards the ruling class, but a genuine concern for the underprivileged
that characterizes his cinemaÉ his central interest remainsÉ in the struggles
of the oppressed than the acts of the powerful. All his films, in one way or
the other, are celebrations of (or pleas for) nonviolent forms of resistance.Õ
(theseventhart)
When one sees his films, one realizes that
he must travel and shoot almost all the time, in all kinds of places and
situations, recording events as they happen, engaging with a variety of people
and taking the time to understand where they are coming from. In Jai Bhim
Comrade, the interview with the Kabir Kala Manch singer Sheetal SatheÕs
mother was a revelation to me as I was forced to recognize the complex
challenges that Sheetal has surmounted to be the person she is. With that
conversation, Anand humanizes the politics of caste, gender and religion so
that when Sheetal sings Maajhi Maay (My Mother) she encapsulates
the pain of centuries of Dalit oppression and draws attention to the bedrock of
courage that is the steel in their souls.
Anand
understands the Indian penchant for emotion and uses it to invite the viewerÕs
empathy; whether poignant or perverse, emotion is the bridge that he uses to
beckon one into his argument. He wants us to see what happens to individuals in
moments of stress and pain, but he is always patient, never letting his camera
look away even when they struggle to find words, when emotions overwhelm them,
when hopelessness is at its most unbearable; he applauds their dignity and
waits with them like a friend.
He even affords
the same opportunity to the fundamentalists and when they canÕt show any
regret, any awareness of the brutality of their actions, he steps back to let
us make up our own minds about their conduct. In an intriguing combination of
ideas and values, Just Another Film Buff calls Anand Patwardhan the child of
Karl Marx and Gandhi and sees in his films efforts to demonstrate that this
marriage is not just chimerical utopianism, but a practical possibility.
Then Anand has to make sense of all the
material he has collected. I have often wondered what it must mean to over and
over again see footage that is almost unbearable for us to watch even once
– how does he retain his sanity and belief in human beings? He edits by himself
mostly, shut away in a tiny room (the only one with an air conditioner –
his equipment needs it , not he himself), the peace regularly destroyed by the
loud aartis and bells of the temple next door (a most peculiar irony),
willing and eager to show segments heÕs working on to his friends roped in to
watch and comment; young people around him always, curious about everything
that people think and talk about. In between he takes breaks to play tennis in
the gymkhana across the road from where he lives, and to watch cricket –
both activities lead to much excitement and argument; he being a person given
to fighting for the underdog always.
He has never
tried to raise money for his films, preferring to self-finance and to work at
his own pace and choosing his subjects and style. He has said that he cannot
work on commissioned projects because then one gets what the consumer wants,
which is not the purpose of making documentary films, in an echo of Robert
BressonÕs advice: ÔTry to show that which, without you, might never have been
seen.Õ This decision must be a tough one as the films he makes are not geared
towards making large revenues and entail travel and take years to put together.
Alongside he is often in court fighting (and winning) cases to get his films
passed by censors or shown even after getting National Awards – another
amazing irony that can happen only in India. And he finds the time to stand up
for others in a similar predicament like members of the Kabir Kala Manch who
had been forced to go underground after police began to brand them as Maoist
ÔNaxalitesÕ.
Anand has probably been an conscientious
objector from childhood, having grown up in a staunchly socialist, liberal
family (a stint at a tony boarding school must have contributed in spades to
his revulsion towards unfairness) and as a student having participated in the
anti-Vietnam War movement, worked in Kishore Bharati, a rural development and
education project in central India and participated in the Bihar
anti-corruption movement in 1974-75, and in the civil liberties and democratic
rights movement during and after the 1975-77 Emergency.
This early
schooling has lasted and reflects in all that he does; for example in the ways
in which he shows his films – the locations where they are screened, the
people who are part of the audience and the discussions that follow. Waves
of Revolution was not only shot clandestinely on outdated film using
whichever camera they could borrow and with sound recorded on a cassette
player, it was also screened at secret gatherings. A print was cut up and sent
out of the country in bits so that it could be saved from the Censors –
this was the Emergency, remember. Jai Bhim Comrade was screened at
Ramabai Nagar, a Dalit colony in Mumbai on a makeshift screen where the
audience stood and watched for three and a half hours and then stayed on to
talk about it.
This is what
Anand is waiting for, this is the reason why he works the way he does –
this direct engagement with the audience, the immediate, lively and meaningful
communication with viewers that is the USP of the live performance; this is
what the actor in the theatre looks for. Anand takes a pre-recorded form, film,
and turns it into live theatre. The discussion sometimes begins slowly,
awkwardly and sometimes with a outpouring of opinions and comments. Anand is
provocative only if necessary but he constantly pushes for clarity, guiding the
discussion to stop it from wandering off, but mostly letting all sorts of ideas
and contradictions emerge. His is a mature and passionate voice, tempered now
by the years and experiences and therefore much more potent.
In June 2012, War and Peace/Jung aur Aman
(someone suggested that it could well have been titled ÔWar and Peace:
Or How I Learned to Forget Gandhi and Worship the BombÕ) was
released in two multiplexes in Mumbai, a major event as no Indian documentary
had ever had a theatrical release anywhere in the world and hope floated that
documentaries would become a lucrative form of entertainment. It was premature
excitement unfortunately but there is no doubt that more and more young Indians
are watching documentaries today. Anand is deeply connected to the effort to
build a sustainable future for this form in India and the world.
Along with his
partner Simantini Dhuru and others he runs Vikalp, a platform for screenings at
Prithvi House in Juhu, where documentary films are shown twice a month to an
enthusiastic audience that stays on to discuss and argue what they have
witnessed. Anand is there for most of the screenings, leading the discussions
and offering a constant reminder of the purpose behind such films.
His home is open
to young filmmakers, writers, poets, stand-up comics, lawyers and activists of
all stripes and the discussions are animated, sometimes stormy but always
passionate and full of colour and song. He travels to festivals to participate
in the ever-expanding
reach of new ideas and ways of communicating them; he often wins awards,
nationally and internationally, but we hardly hear him speak of that; heÕs
happier to talk about the reactions of the audiences and his interaction with
other filmmakers of his ilk. He is an enthusiastic poster boy for the
documentary film movement – he even has the good looks for it!
ThereÕs another Anand that lives very close
to the surface but emerges only once in a while as a balladeer, the everready,
boyishly enthusiastic singer of Dylan and Baez and Kishore Kumar songs. At a
friendÕs farm near Mumbai, sitting around the bonfire, his guitar strung and
tuned, the harmonica and its stand adjusted, Anand is ready to turn into Bob
Dylan and Joan Baez and Vilas Ghoghre and Sheetal Sathe, embodying all their
longing for change and their protest against the inequities of the world for,
to sing is to protest! To watch him sing (and singing along) ÔJoe HillÕ or
ÔBlowing in the WindÕ or ÔAa Chal ke TujheÕ is to, for a brief interlude, turn
back the clock and find oneself once more a young student full of unsullied
hope and the off-hand belief that life can only change for the better. And that
brief interlude fans the embers of the passion for a better future in us, as do
all his films.
When asked to
deliver a message for future documentary filmmakers, Anand Patwardhan said, ÔNo
message really. Do it only if it burns when you donÕt.Õ
May his burn
last and set alight fires in all of us.