Mise en scène of a Mystic Man: The Iconography of a Suave Filmmaker
‘There is a cure for everything except death’, proclaimed a brooding Antonio Ricci resonating an unfazed tinge of optimism in Bicycle Thieves, one of Dr. Bhupen Hazarika’s most favourite movies. This 1948 neo-realist classic of Vittorio de Sica along with Indian maestro Sayajit Ray’s masterpiece ‘Pather Panchali’ and few other New Wave films not only cast a spell on Bhupen Hazarika but also infused into him the spirit of cinema and moulded the conscientious filmmaker in him. And those who have taken a plunge into the cinematic world of this living legend have not an iota of doubt about the robust optimist and the conscientious filmmaker he epitomises. In a cerebral article “Chalachitra Sangha Andolanar Uddeshya Ki” inducted in “Sundarar Na-Diganta”(The New Horizons of The Beautiful), a seminal book published in 1967, Dr. Bhupen Hazarika unambiguously gave vent to his take on the essence of films. To him, a good film is not just an unflinching fountain of innocuous entertainment but an efficient and potent tool of mass education and cultural awareness. Throwing lurid light on the mottos of the film associations, he reiterated that the mottos of a film society should include a well-contrived strategy to persuade the filmmaker to make films keeping in view scientific and cultural education for the masses. The film should inculcate an ardent penchant in the society to learn more. He advocated making of scientific, educational, cultural movies and creation of awareness of making a film with all these values.
Dr. Hazarika forayed into Indian cinema at a crucial transitional juncture in the 6os when the Indian New Wave Cinema was fast gaining momentum and all set to give a fresh lease of life to the language of cinema in India. This Parallel Cinema Movement began to take shape from the late 1940s to the 1960s under the stewardship of prodigies such as Satyajit Ray, Ritwik Ghatak, Bimal Roy, Mrinal Sen, Khwaja Ahmad Abbas, Chetan Anand and V. Shantaram. This period is considered part of the 'Golden Age' of Indian cinema. Filmmakers of this era collectively created a body of work known for its ‘technical brilliance , artistic simplicity and thematic grandeur’. This cinema heavily drew upon the Indian literature of the times, and hence emerged as an important study of the contemporary Indian society, and is now used by scholars and historians alike to map the changing demographic and socio-economic dynamics as well as political temperament of the Indian populace. They used it to highlight prevalent issues and sometimes to throw open new issues for the public. Certain films of this New genre turned out to be revenue grossers in an industry propelled and dominated by the so-called mainstream films structured round fantastical song and dance, and replete with extravagant action and bizarre melodrama. These films palatably blended features of both art and commercial cinema. Bimal Roy's ‘Do Bigha Zamin’ (1953), which was both a commercial and critical success, was one of the earliest examples of this ‘fusion’ cinema. The film won the International Prize at the 1954 Cannes Film Festival and paved the way for the Indian New Wave. Hrishikesh Mukherjee, one of Hindi cinema's most successful filmmakers, loomed large as one of the few successful exponents of this much raved about 'middle cinema', which, according to Encyclopedia Britannica, carved a middle path between the extravagance of mainstream cinema and the stark realism of art cinema. He was renowned for making films that reflected the changing middle-class ethos in a serious but entertaining way. Another filmmaker to exquisitely mingle art and commercial cinema was Guru Dutt, whose film Pyaasa ( 1957) featured in Time magazine's "All-TIME" 100 best movies list. As a filmmaker making his debut at this transitional juncture of Indian cinema in the 60s, Dr. Hazarika seemed to be inexorably caught up in a rather twilight zone. But as a confirmed philanthropist and mass artist with pragmatic moorings , he naturally showed allegiance to the ‘fusion ‘or ‘middle’ cinema . Thus Dr. Bhupen Hazarika’s films are often imbued with the familiar ingredients of a formulaic, run of the mill mainstream entertainer. But then they are always exhilarated with emotionally vibrant and socio-culturally veracious and relevant themes ----themes explored and treated with the panache and dexterity of a serious filmmaker. Always tangible in them is the filmmaker’s longing to serve certain altruistic ends.
Dr. Bhupen Hazarika’s directorial debut ‘Era Bator Sur’(Tunes of the Abandoned Road) hit the screen in 1956. His maiden venture unveiled before the discerning audience his conscious endeavour to lend a touch of realism in line with the New Indian Cinema of the time. Dr. Hazarika came up with his own style of cinematic treatment and storytelling which was not just distinct but also cinematically convincing. Teeming with an intense socialistic zeal as an active member of Indian Peoples’ Theatre Association in the fifties, he too, was deeply moved by the weal and woes, relentless struggles and hope and aspirations of the common masses and devoted himself to creative works related to folk music and culture of the common Assamese people. ‘Era Bator Sur’ was an outcome of one such creative effort. The story and the music of ‘Era Bator Sur’ reflect the emotional attributes and effusions of the people of that era. The film is a cerebral , sensitive and highly realistic portrayal of a young artist’s empirical and emotional quest of the essence of his art, the abhorrent exploitation of the downtrodden, the simplicity and credulity of tribal farmers. But ‘Era Bator Sur’ is above all, as Dr. Bhupen Hazarika himself admitted on many an occasion , an intensely autobiographical film. The protagonist Jayanta Duara , a man of sensitive ,dainty and conscientious artistic temperament , who was modelled on Dr. Hazarika himself to a great extent, fell in love with and proposed to Nisha Phukon, a popular actress . But they failed to get along with each other. It was then that Jayanta Duara set out on his mission in quest of the tunes of the abandoned folk songs with a sense of conviction that the soil of his motherland, hopefully, would not misunderstand him. The cast of the movie included seasoned actor of contemporary Hindi cinema Balraj Sahni, stalwarts like Phani Sarmah, Bishnu Rabha, Dr. Bhupen Hazarika’s maiden venture could neither create ripples at the national level nor click at the box office. Eclipsed by films like Satyajit Ray’s ‘Aporajito’ and Asit Sen’s ‘Salasal’, ‘Era Bator Sur’ apparently was lost in the maze. But it was a trendsetter in Assamese Cinema in which symbolism of profound suggestivity and poetic beauty was effectively used for the first time. The haunting melody of its songs coupled with sublime meaning has lingered on . Lata Mangeskar rendered her golden voice to present an unforgettable melody in Assamese when she sang for the first time for Dr. Bhupen Hazarika–“Jonakore Rati Asomire Mati....’’to perpetuate Bhupen Hazarika’s credentials .
Dr .Hazarika’s second Assamese film and third directorial venture was ‘Sakuntala’(1961), which was a celluloid adaptation of the classical epic drama “Abhigyanam Sakuntalam”. He dealt with the original storyline of the epic drama in his own innovative style .Although his treatment of the story elicited criticism ,the film turned out to be a crowed puller in its own right. Its music ,which was composed by Dr Hazarika himself, waltzed its way into the hearts of thousands and was extolled for its meaning and melody. “Sakuntala’ is a milestone in his filmography as well in that it was his first film which brought him a coveted National Award in the form of the President’s Silver Medal for the Best Regional Film of the year.
In 1964, Bhupen Hazarika came up with his third Assamese film, ‘Protidhwani’. It was again a trademark Bhupen Hazarika film which was a fusion of stark realism, social relevance, familiar fantastical and melodramatic stuff of the mainstream movies. Lying at the core of ‘Protidhwani’ was a sincere desire to highlight and promote the age old harmony and fraternity that have existed untainted since time immemorial among the different communities and tribes inhabiting the hills and plains of the North East India in a purely apolitical and artistic context. The plot of the film drew blood from a well-known Khasi love story ‘Manik-Raitong’. The film was exulted by both critics and connoisseurs for its art direction, costumes and superb performances of a few characters, specially that of Bishnu Prasad Rabha who played a Khasi King in the film. Dr. Bhupen Hazarika was once more at his best as the music director and its wonderful music and lyrics were rendered immortal by the golden voices of seasoned singers like Talat Mehmud, Sumon Kalyanpur and Bhupen Hazarika himself. His brilliant effort did not go unnoticed and unrecognised. ‘Protidhwani’ brought Bhupen Hazarika the President’s Silver Medal for the second time.
Dr. Bhupen Hazarika’s 1966 movie, ‘Lotighoti’ broke away a bit from his usual cinematic narratives and stylistics, but firmly stuck to his creed . He turned a bit experimentative and innovative both in themes and techniques while making “Lotighoti”. The film convincingly conjures up a realistic picture of the numerous deterrents that the film directors from the Eastern part of the country, who had to go to Tollygunge, the Mecca of filmmaking , for making their own films had to encounter. In a subtle yet sardonic tongue-in-the-check tone, Dr. Hazarika admirably recreated a veracious spectacle of the way in which the directors of his own times compromised or rather were made to compromise with the given situation to achieve desired success in their ventures. As part of his cinematic experimentations, he cast characters in roles closer to those in their own life. For instance, Ratna Ojah , an exponent of Vaishnavite culture was cast as Dhanpati Bayan and he had to do in the film what he was accustomed to do in his personal life. Similarly renowned dance maestro Jatin Goswami was asked to play a dance teacher in the film. All that lent an extra touch of realism to the film. He repeated the same experiment in his next film ‘Sikmik Bijuli’ with desired success. ‘Lotighoti’ earned Bhupen Hazarika the President’s Silver Medal for a third time.
Dr. Bhupen Hazarika has directed three more full length Assamese feature films since ‘Lotighoti’. But none of them----‘Sikmik Bijuli’(1969), ‘Mon Prajapoti’(1979) and ‘Siraj’(1988)—could grab accolades from the critics or steal the show at the box office .Some critics allege that the equilibrium of the art cinema and the formulaic mainstream movie had somehow gone wayward in these films . It would be ,however, unjust to dismiss them as mediocre or average stuff. The connoisseurs of Dr. Hazarika’s films never fail to discern the marked improvement of cinematic treatment and techniques in these films. Despite their failure to click at both film festivals and box office, they stand out among the contemporary Assamese films for a variety of reasons and are generally hailed as laudable cinematic efforts. “Sikmik Bijuli”(1969) hit the screen in the same year Assamese Cinema was raving over the emergence of its first blockbuster ‘Dr. Bezborua’(1969). Although the spectacular commercial success and hitherto unknown technical finesse of ‘Dr. Bezborua’ overshadowed the emotion-clad tear-jerking realism of ‘Sikmik Bijuli’, the latter could still manage to find a cosy room for itself in the domain of Assamese cinema. As a realistic portrayal of the seamy slum life , which is an integral part of city life, the film depicts a touching story of the ‘modus vivendi’ of the slum dwellers, their hopes, aspirations, thoughts and values. In the film in which Bijoy Shankar, Bidya Rao and Tasduq Yousuf played the leads, famous Bengali actress Ruma Guha Thakurta was cast in a very catchy role. The film also did a fairly good business. Hailed by many as a thought provoking philosophical exploration of and probing into love relationships and certain other related crucial socio-cultural issues , ‘Man Prajapoti’ broke way from the popular mould and set a new trend of story selection in Assamese cinema. The music of both ‘Sikmik Bijuli’ and ‘Man Prajapoti’ , however, clicked and kept Dr. Hazarika’s reputation as a top ranked music director intact. ‘Siraj’(1988), which was based on a popular short story was literally a remake of Natasurya Phani Sharma’s 1948 film of the same name. The film was redesigned and refurbished keeping in mind the palates and needs of the current audience and presented as a glowing tribute to the legendary artist. Dr. Bhupen Hazarika made a full length Assamese feature film, ‘Miri Jiyori” for Doordarshan on celluloid. He also directed, composed music and sang for ‘Mahut Bandhure’ in 1958, a Bengali film which depicted the eternal bond of love, obedience and tolerance between man and elephant. He produced, directed, and composed music for Arunachal Pradesh’s first Hindi feature film in colour ‘Mera Dharam Meri Ma’ in 1977. He directed a colour documentary for the Arunachal Pradesh Government on Tribal folk songs and dances entitled ‘For Whom The Sun Shines’ in 1974. He produced and directed a documentary ‘Emuthi Saular Kahini’ based on the co- operative movement for the Govt. of Assam entirely in lyrical form. He produced and directed a half-hour documentary for Calcutta Doordarshan Kendra in 1977 on the folk songs and dances of North East India entitled ‘Through Melody and Rhythm.’ He also produced another 18-part documentary entitled ‘Glimpses of the Misty East’ on the socio economic and cultural progress in North Eastern India from 1947 to 1997, assigned to him by the Ministry of Information and Broadcasting, Govt. of India for celebration of Fifty years of India’s Independence. In a valiant bid to restore the glory of the first Assamese movie “Joymoti’ and its maker Jyoti Prasad Agarwala, Bhupen Hazarika went through fire and water to restore the distorted and damaged print of “Joymoti”. With utmost diligence and assiduity , he made a documentary movie on the life of Jyoti Prasad, incorporated it with the restored print ,meticulously edited the whole project in 1976 . The result was a precious docu-feature ‘Rupkonwar Jyoti Prasad Aru Joymoti, in which he himself rendered the voice over commentary.
Dr. Bhupen Hazarika’s outstanding contributions to cinema are not circumscribed to only a handful of good films and documentaries that he made. Connoisseurs of Dr. Bhupen Hazarika would never deny that the filmmaker in him lapses into quiescence beside the colossal singer, lyricist and music composer in him. The film director in him might have failed at times ,but the music director of his films has always triumphed. He has composed music and sung for the maximum number of Assamese films over the last five decades. Apart from his own films, the other Assamese films that he composed music for are ’Sati Beula’(1954), ‘Pioli Phukon’(1955),’Dhumuha’(1957), ‘Kecha Sone’(1959), ‘Puwati Nishar Sapon(1959),’Moniram Dewan’(1964), ‘Khoj’(1975), “Chameli Memsab’(1975),’Palashar Rang’(1976), “Banahansa”(1977), “Banjui’(1978), “Akon”(1980), “Aparoopa’(1982), ‘Angikar’(1985), ‘Juge Juge Sangram’(1986), ‘Ma’(1986), ‘Sankalpa’(1986), ‘Protishodh’(1987), ‘Priyajan’(1993), ‘Asanta Prahar’(1994), ‘Pani’(1995) and Sati Radhika. He grabbed the National Award of Best Music Director for Abdul Majid’s ‘Chameli Memsab’ in 1975. The only Bodo film for which Dr. Bhupen Hazarika has composed music is ‘Jeuni Simang’.(1987). He gave music for one Bhojpuri film entitled ‘Sath Maiya Ki Mahima’(1979).
He directed music in a number of outstanding Bengali films, such as ‘Jiban Trishna’, ‘Jonakir Alo’, ‘Mahut Bandhure’, ‘Kari o Komal’, ‘Asamapta’, ‘Ekhane Pinjar’, ‘Dampati’, ‘Chameli Memsaab’, ‘Dui Bechara’, ‘Simana Periye”, ‘Gajamukta’ and ‘Sopan. Bhupen Hazarika composed music for several well-known Hindi films, which include quite a few award winning movies. They are ‘Aroop’, ‘Meri Dharam Meri Ma’’, ‘Chameli Memsab’, ‘Ek Pal’, ‘Rudaali’, “Papiha’, ‘Saaz’, ‘Darmian’, ‘Mil Gaye Manzil Mujhe”, “Gaja Gamini’, ‘Daman” and ‘Kyon”. Thus Dr. Bhupen Hazarika’s outstanding contribution to Indian Cinema in general and Assamese Cinema in particular also consists in his majestic works as a singer, lyricist and music composer of the highest calibre. This is what seems to have had a profound bearing upon Dr. Bhupen Hazarika’s selection for the most prestigious film award of our country. When the Dada Saheb Phalke Award was conferred on him in 1994 for lifetime achievements as an auteur , special mention was made of his extraordinary role in giving Indian film music an unprecedented dignity and grace.
No doubt, as a filmmaker reposing faith in ‘middle’ or ‘fusion’ cinema, Dr. Bhupen Hazarika could never elevate himself to the artistic and technical heights of his contemporary illustrious counterparts. He could never amaze the film fraternity with a ‘Do Bigha Jamin’ or a “Pyassa’ or a ‘ Mother India or a ‘Pather Panchali’. But that can hardly undo his reputation as a venerable filmmaker . His charismatic touch as a prodigious music maestro aptly makes up for his lacuna as a filmmaker. Legendary film theorist ,scholar and critic, Andre Bazin opined that it could be misleading to judge the greatness of a great filmmaker always in the light of his creative masterpieces and artistic success as such an approach often undermines the consistency of temperament and tastefulness in a director, his relentless struggle to tide over the impasses inside and outside him. Bazin’s dictum seems pretty relevant to any assessment of an auteur like Dr. Bhupen Hazarika .
Sunday, August 29, 2010
Sunday, July 4, 2010
Tuesday, June 29, 2010
Looking Through the Kaleidoscope of a Master Filmmaker: The Archetypal Indian Woman’s Search for an ‘Essentialist Identity’ in a Patriarchal Society
1. "I cannot make films which are contrary to realism. I have never made such films, nor I would make in future. My cinema depicts true aspects of human life, with possible creative inputs from me, both as a writer and filmmaker." - Dr. Bhabendra Nath Saikia
2. “No, no….I do not need all that, I need just a shelter, work and food without being called a servant. I need nothing else.”--- Saru to Moti in Sandhyaraag
3. “I wanted to be a Sita. But a Sita could exist only when there is a Rama!”---Menoka in Agnisnan
The connoisseurs of serious Assamese films, who have fallen under the spell of Dr. Bhabendranath Saikia’s celluloid world, hardly fail to discern that an authentic microcosm of Indian woman as ‘the Other’, the marginalized entity, the victim of a patriarchal socio-cultural set-up flares up in his films .It seems he consciously strives to create a “new space” and shape a new “essentialist” identity for the traditional Indian woman who is inexorably caught up in the throes of an insensitive and callous patriarchal society which seeks to mythify her into certain ‘inessentialist’ archetypal images, and who is ironically unaware of her ‘inessentiality’. Indian women, he seems to assert, can mould a new destiny for themselves breaking the jinx of the archetypal image of the submissive, placid and pliant woman, only when they become aware of the need to know their true selves and understand their ‘essentiality’ in society.
Dr. Bhabendra Nath Saikia is a colossus among the contemporary Assamese writers and filmmakers. In the arena of modern Indian literature and films, he is one of the most powerful voices and one of the very few who have attempted to use literary and cinematic tool as a means for detached portrayal of social change and crucial socio-cultural issues without being a propagandist. His literary works and the films, most of which are based on his own literary works, have distinct artistic sensitivity and pulsation of life that are not quite common in the contemporary Assamese literature and Indian films. Here is a valiant and sensitive ‘modern man’ who has a flair for realism and who is, in spite of being a male himself, almost obsessed with the predicaments and dilemmas of Indian women and their often traumatic experiences and consequences in a traditionally defined socio-cultural and political set-up of male hegemony . He has a distinct predilection for the portrayal of the inner landscapes of his woman protagonists----their anguished cry of desolation and boredom, their neurotic loneliness in the midst of a crowd, their oceanic vacuity, their abysmal despair, their Hamletian vacillation in renouncing or accepting the catastrophic events of their lives as ‘Fate accomplice’, their frail and passive attempts to gain a voice and fulfilling identity and their rebellion against the forces that tend to stifle their spirit .Their struggles often culminate in some not-too-soothing ends. Most of his films do not have ‘to-live-happily ever-after’ kind of ends if not tragic and self-annihilating ones. In them, he portrays the socio-cultural transitions that India has undergone as he focuses on the incredible power of family and society and the relationships between the members of the family, paying close attention to women suppressed and moulded by conservative Indian society. Thus it is the woman, the ‘Other’ in postcolonial terms , the tainted , desolate, subdued entity in a callous society , the victim of a male-oriented hegemony that emerges as the cynosure in the thematic complexes of his major films. His probing into the sensibility and the inner workings of the minds of his woman characters provides a kind of microcosm of life where his major women characters can discern their infinite variety. And this alone establishes Dr. Bhabendra Nath Saikia as a veracious delineator of women. The present paper aims at bringing under microscope the slices of life that the female protagonists in his celluloid world live. The focus is on interpreting and analyzing how he portrays the predicaments and dilemmas, psychic tremours, painful ordeals, bruished feelings, frustrations and agonies, frail but relentless struggles of his major female characters in his films . The present paper intends to peep into the world of shattered dreams, thwarted hopes, tainted identity and morbid existences, and also the ‘flipper of hope’ that his women experience in life. Dr. Saikia’s films unveil before us the familiar world of Indian women----a world that relegates woman to a marginalized entity, a world marked by acute gender bias, a world which often turns out to be nothing less than a hell for the woman------a world where life continues, but living ends for her. It is a male world the callousness of which often shatters and thwarts the dreams and aspirations of Menoka, Kiran, Saru, Taru, Putoli, Laxmi and Jayanti, but it is where they are fated to fend for themselves or perish.
Few will deny Dr. Bhabendra Nath Saikia’s films, barring 'Sarothi' and 'Kalsandhya', are a cerebral and serious critique of the psyche and predicament of the archetypal Indian woman in a predominantly male-oriented society although he juxtaposes certain other crucial , socially relevant and cerebral themes with it in his films. Almost all of his women teeter on the edges of an 'inessentialist identity' which they are forced to embrace by the traditional male hegemony of the society. Paradoxically enough, though a male himself, Dr. Saikia, with an extraordinary insight into the female psyche, explores both the inner and outer worlds of his women. His attitude is one of compassion and understanding. His woman protagonist is neither a Saint Joan nor a Nora. But true to her real life , she always struggles in her reel life to reconcile to her fate, sometimes suffering meekly, at other times compromising with her debilitating circumstances, and at yet other times rebelling against the system . Consequently there flares up a series of woman protagonists in his films who at once catch our attention and make us introspect.
Lying at the core of Dr. B.N. Saikia’s debut film “Sandhyarag” is the menace of acute poverty that stagnates and threatens the very existence of rural masses in India. Though the film dwells on poverty in general in rural India , Dr. Saikia is apt to unveil before us how the woman folk suffers still more from uncertainty and terror of poverty in a male dominated society which not only restricts the free movement of women but also marginalizes their options. Putoli, her two daughters, Saru and Taru are three women trapped in the vortex of acute poverty and its resultant uncertainty and hopelessness. In their very childhood, Putoli had to send Saru and Taru to the nearby town to serve as maids. The problem of survival was thus solved amicably for a while. Both the sisters adapted well to their working environments and things went on smoothly for some years. Saru’s character is portrayed focusing on her essence and her psyche. We can discover instantly how the woman in her is constantly reeling under economic insecurity and its resultant uncertainty about life and future in general. Her mother and younger sister are no exception. And her sense of uncertainty and fear is well justified . Reluctant to bear the burden of two grown up girls ,the siblings are sent back home by their respective masters as they come of age. Here the gander disparity is more than evident. If Saru and Taru were boys, they would gain more in strength and acceptability with the process of growing up. But alas, they are girls! And girls experience the contrary in the male-dominated society in which they operate. They once more become hapless, wretched and insecure dogged by abject poverty and joblessness. The situation turns out to be still more deplorable for them as being in town, they could not learn any competence for works available in villages. When Saru was with Nandan Das’s family, she got close to Moti, the chauffeur of the family. Moti himself is a frail, pathetic figure who has been ruthlessly deserted by his wife for being impotent. Moti happens to visit Saru’s home on a fateful day as he has to bring his master to Saru’s village for a public meeting. After a long time , Saru and Taru get an opportunity to work as they are entrusted with the responsibility of cooking the feast for the guests coming from town. The guests are entertained well ,but Moti who was waiting in the car fo hi master is ignored. At night , hungry to death, Moti approaches Saru’s family, his old acquaintances for some food. But to his surprise, Saru sobs and breaks down in front of him---“Nothing to offer you. Not even a crumb of rice. You have gone without food only today, but we since yesterday. Please take me away………” Greatly baffled and almost shocked Moti reminds her of his worthlessness as a male, of the grim reality that his own wife deserted him for being impotent. But to a woman inexorably trapped in the vicious cycle of poverty and uncertainty, food security matters most; she is forced to sacrifice her all other desires----“No, no….I do not need all that, I need just a shelter, work and food without being called a servant. I need nothing else.” To astonish Moti still more, Taru and Putoli pray to him to take them as well with him. They are ready to do anything under the sun for Moti and Saru . Thus paradoxically, three sane and sensible women prostrate before a frail, insulted, humiliated male member of their society for their survival.
‘Anirban’ is Dr Saikia’s second feature film in which he dwells on a pretty cerebral and dainty facet of a common woman’s psyche. Though the film touchingly treats the mundane weal and woes of life that at times culminates in tragic consequences , Dr. Saikia’s probing into the psyche of his major woman character Bhagyawati instantly catches our attention. Sadness is all pervasive in the film and Rajani and Bhagyawati embody that pitiless, heart-rending sadness. Rajani and Bhagyawati were a childless couple for a long time. Not that Bhagyawati did not conceive . But under tragic circumstances, she lost her child three times either before birth or just after birth. Her tragedy adversely impinged on her body and mind . Her husband, though a sober and sedate person himself, had to take a lot of pain to attend on her, soothe her and bring her back to normal health. But then a girl child , Nisha ,was born and she survived. Nisha became the apple of her parents’ eyes. Nisha’s birth added new hue and colour to her life.With the advent of Nisha, Bhagyawati blossomed into an affectionate, caring, doting, responsible, and vigilant mother. When Nisha seemed to have an amorous affair of some sort with Dewakar, she was worried to death and acted promptly to curb that with her husband . But Bhagyawati’s bliss proved short-lived as Nisha suddenly died prematurely. The sudden demise of Nisha toppled Bhagyawati’s world again. But to our surprise, her desire to be a mother, probably a hidden , universal, and instinctive desire in every conventional woman, does not cease to exist. In spite of the tragic end of her only child, she does not wither as a mother this time . She now starts showering her motherly love and care on Diwakar, Nisha’s beloved. Bhagyawati along with her husband took part wholeheartedly in Diwakar’s marriage . To Bhagyawati, he is nothing short of her own son. Again, she showers the affection and care of a grandmother on Diwakar’s son . Every moment Bhagyawati’s motherly presence is tangible in the film. Bhagyawati , with all her selfless love, care, concern and sacrifices for her child and later for Diwakar , epitomizes the eternal mother figure. It is what distinguishes her in the conventional male-oriented society.
Menoka is the central character in Dr. B. N. Saikia’s much talked about film ‘ Agnisnan’ (Ordeal) partly based on his literary ‘tour de force’ ‘ Antareep’. The film is a gripping , cerebral tale of a woman’s ‘inessentialist identity’ and her daredevil attitude to assert her own independent will in a traditional society controlled and propelled by male hegemony. Menoka is a successful housewife who leaves no stone unturned to fit into the role her family and her society expect her to play. And she succeeds spectacularly in that archetypal role. She manages her household well, rears her children, waits on her husband and keeps him satisfied and happy. But even then her husband, an influential and rich person in the village, suddenly brings in a young girl, marries her and starts making love to her all before the eyes of Menoka totally ignoring her presence. Mohikanta does all that without showing any signs of compunction and caring for what his faithful wife would feel about it. He does all that as if he were privileged to do such an act. In a social set up where all the social customs, norms and traditions are framed to suit the male folk, Mohikanta’s act is looked upon as a natural occurrence. But Menoka feels insulted, humiliated and marginalized. She is muddled to death why Mohikanta got fed up with her, how he could do such a nefarious act without an iota of compunction. After all she did everything possible to appease him and keep him in good stead! And he too, seemed satisfied. Is it merely for sexual gratification? He finds her world shattered, her essence , her pride as a conventionally successful woman badly tainted. She can never justify Mohikanta’s act, and resolves to set things right in her own way. If Mohikanta is independent to assert his will, so is she. She would avenge herself upon callous and unconscientious Mohikanta and the social system that nurtures people like him by asserting her independence. She is also entitled to doing what Mohikanta is as both of them are members of the same society. But Menoka knows very well how hostile the value system of the patriarchal society is to woman emancipation and equality. After going through a series of acute mental conflict, she decides to pay Mohikanta his own coins. For the purpose, she chooses Madan, not-too-respectable a man in the village, in fact, a thief, but respectful and compassionate to her. She establishes a rapport with Madan , goes physical with him , and gets pregnant . When Mohikanta comes to know it and flings at her character, irked Menoka cries out ---“I wanted to be a Sita. But a Sita could exist only when there is a Rama!” Thus Menoka, a faithful conformist to the archetypal image of the woman in a traditionally patriarchal society, breaks free from its atrocious bondage to register a protest against a value system that favours only the man folk.
Kiran is the other important woman character in ‘Agnisnan’. A meek, mild, shadowlike character, Kiran is reminiscent of a typical conformist woman in a male-dominated society. She is as it were born to be the victim of the male hegemony. She has not much of a choice about what happens to her. She has to be the so-called second wife , almost a concubine of an influential male member of the society. But she has learnt to adapt to the values and expectations of her society and can easily cope with it without much effort. She naturally lacks any sense of self-respect and rebellious spirit. She has never thought about her own desires and her own essence, her ‘essentialist identity’ and tries to give meaning to her life by conforming to what her society determines for her. She has no problem embracing the subverting status of ‘Other’.
Dr. B.N.Saikia’s “Kolahal”(The Turmoil) is another emotionally satisfying and intellectually stimulating film that draws its blood from its central woman protagonist Kiran, a lower class, poor housewife and a mother , and a conventional woman. Kiran is a typical average woman whose world is shaped and moulded by what dominates the world of such a woman in the conventional patriarchal society----a husband, a house and her children. She is happy in her own way with her husband and her son , Moti, in spite of a pretty humble life. There she lives in a substandard ,feebly-built hut in a slum-like ambience with her husband and son constantly fighting poverty and uncertainty. But then her husband suddenly disappears with the promise that he would be back soon. The same old story is repeated ---the story of an innocent, faithful , credulous ,humble wife duped and dumped by a cunning ,shrewd casanova . Credulous Kiran waits for her husband’s return, and all but Kiran know that he is not going to return . Consequently Kiran faces all that a lonely, young and attractive woman does in a male-dominated society. Quite a few tries to woo and seduce her . Some tease and harass her. A few even proposes to live in with her. But she goes undaunted, unfazed never succumbing to such pressures and temptations. She takes recourse to Moti, her adolescent son, as a psychological shelter. To cope with the escalating economic crunch, she starts working in a rice godown. There too,she faces the same exploitative, harassing environment. All of a sudden ,Moti is killed in an accident. She totally breaks down. The handyman who was responsible for Moti’s killing tries to get close to Kiran. Though a compassionate, good-natured and trustworthy fellow, the guilt conscience and pity of the male-chauvinist in him provoke him to do something to save the hapless woman from her fathomless despair. Kiran at first connives at his advances, but gradually she can see his difference from other males she has encountered in her life. Her faith is restored gradually. She decides to take a chance, not out of any amorous feelings or biological needs, but out of an innate desire to mother forth another Moti and to regain a sense of security. Kiran, though an ordinary woman to the core, speaks of the dignity, integrity, motherly instincts, security consciousness and conformist attitude of a woman in a traditionally patriarchal socio-cultural set up . She is not bold and powerful enough to undo the archetypal image of a woman. But she is prudent enough to reconcile to her destiny amicably . She is adaptative enough to ensure that she survives there with some dignity, recognition and security by being a mother, a housewife, and a homemaker again. Even in the teeth of boundless darkness and despair, she does not lose sight of the reality of a woman in a patriarchal society and decides to take on it her own way. Kiran’s is the instinctive strategy of a woman to fit into the archetypal image approved of by such a society .
After Menoka, Jayanti in ‘Abartan’ (On the Run) is perhaps Dr. Bhabendra Nath Saikia’s second female protagonist who shows the rare gusts to exorcise herself of the ghost of the patriarchal society’s value system that tends to reduce a woman to an insignificant archetypal image. Interestingly, as a sympathetic, understanding and bold male joins hands with Menoka in her mission, Parimol Dutta, another bold, compassionate person stands by Jayanti to enable her to overcome her predicament. Jayanti is the central female character in Dr. Bhabendra Nath Saikia’s film, ‘Abartan’ ( On the Run). When she makes her first appearance in the film in the very first sequence, she is already a crowd- puller, a household name as an actress performing for a reputed Mobile Theatre Troupe. She is smart, glamourous, popular and scandalous as well. Though in her mid thirties, she still looks pretty young, energetic, and attractive. But she is already tired, exhausted, fed up and worn out at heart after thirteen long years in theatre. Jayanti took to a professional acting career not by choice but by compulsion. Finding no other way to fend for herself with some dignity and in an attempt to get away from the sneering gazes of gossip-mongers , she took to that career almost as the last resort. And she could do well as she had always showed great acting prowess during her school and college days and grabbed a number of awards in that field as an amateur. Her beauty , smartness and agreeability added to her popularity. In the very early days of her youth, she dared to break away from the typical mould of the lower middle class woman .Unlike such a woman, she was rather a nonconformist of some sort. Much to the astonishment and dismay of many around her, she took part actively in students’ agitation, political activities , mixed up freely with her male counterparts, participated in drama competitions and various other socio-cultural activities without inhibitions-----things which were more than enough to put her good name as a conventional girl at stake. She thus trod the territory forbidden for a ‘good’, respectable woman and had its retribution. She became butt of rumours and scandals---- a fact that wiped out her marital prospects . She did not do anything that her male friends did not do. But while she lost her good name and thereby virtually everything, they being males lost nothing. Rather most of them manipulated the system to serve their own interests and established themselves . Exploited, used, humiliated, Jayanti was left alone with a stained image. After having lost her good name and finding no other viable and respectable ‘modus vivendi’ to fall back on, she took up an acting career in commercial mobile theatres. She easily clicked as an actress by virtue of her talent and beauty. Along with it continued her carefree attitude to life. Already a scandalous figure, she capitalized on her glamour and fan-following and started indulging in extramarital affairs without inhibitions . She was always under scanner for her carefree life style, her bold attitude to promiscuities and her utter nonchalance to the societal norms of decency and respectability . But Jayanti did not bow down . She led her personal life her way but never shrank from her familial duties. Her family lived on her and Jayanti , though aware of their selfishness , never deserted them. It is at this juncture Jayanti comes across Porimal Dutta, a frank, good-natured and attractive Govt. officer who, in spite of knowing Jayanti’s past and present, falls for this outspoken and bold woman smitten by her daredevil attitude, her honesty, her beauty and her magnetism. He proposes to marry her. Jayanti is shocked at first. In a society which has already branded her as a woman of dubious morals, she can not imagine a respectable person like him proposing to marry a woman of her sort. She is in the habit of dealing with men dying to go to bed with her, but a perfectly sane man falling in love with her and proposing to marry her is nothing short of a miracle to her. Porimal, who has already led a very dissipated and promiscuous life and is now fed up and exhausted with all that and wants stability and peace , finds a perfect match in her----matured, sober, frank, bold , and worn out, experienced and prudent like himself. But to Jayanti, it is a really arduous task to say ‘yes’ to Porimal and tear away from her present world as two formidable challenges confront her---- she has already shunned the world of Porimal for ever after much effort and to regain the mental preparedness to re-enter it scares and baffles her beyond measure , and secondly, she is bound to the theatre group for several years by a legal agreement to work with it. Finally Jayanti decides to recreate her own world and turn over a new leaf with new promises of respect and dignity . She joins hands with Porimal to tide over the hurdles and sustain her world. Jayanti is an emblem of the ‘new woman’ who has the gusts not only to withstand the jolt of the traditional patriarchal society but also to take it in her stride and even nurture her own world, if given a chance in the face of such odds.
Laxmi, a young and attractive girl emerges as the cynosure in Dr. Saikia’s last Assamese feature film ‘Itihas’( The Exploration). An innocent, innocuous and hardworking girl, Laxmi faces all the seamy aspects of life in her apparently uneventful life for no fault of hers. For her family, the most formidable challenge is that of survival . After being almost abandoned by her elder brother ,she has to take upon herself the burden of supporting her family and go through fire and water to do that in a fair way. To sustain herself and her family, she starts doing domestic works in a few households in her neighbourhood. A lonely, young ,attractive, and frail woman, she faces all those hazardous and harassing experiences that such a woman faces in a conventional male society. Gradually she gets accustomed to her ambience and her reputation gets stained although she remains integrated and morally scrupulous at heart. Her despair culminates in total gloom when even Madhu, her beloved and the only source of solace in her otherwise dreary and lacklustre life, also dumps her . Life still continues but living ends for her. To protect herself from anti-social forces, she finally has to take shelter in the old well in her neighbourhood that she has been using for years. Laxmi’s death entails the administration to explore the well for the last time and what is unveiled is the sign of the decayed, dirty, and seamy sides of the so-called civilized society. Though it remains rather implicit, the callous, insensitive society to the innocent woman manifests itself. Laxmi’s story is the story of that innocent, average , wretched woman who falls victim to the norms of a society hostile to woman empowerment----a society that tends to stifle and marginalize the woman and make her life miserable.
Although Dr. Saikia refuses to show allegiance to any contemporary postcolonial feminist critical theory, he seems to be well acquainted with the ‘inessentiality’ of the woman in the traditional patriarchal Indian society. For, his literary pieces as well as his films are palpably infested with women who again and again confront their marginalized identity as ‘Other’ and its traumatic and tantalizing effects. Quite tangibly, one of the central concerns of Dr. Bhabendra Nath Saikia in most of his films is the need for and the importance of the emancipation of the woman. The world of women as depicted in his fiction and films is mostly a regressive, chaotic, demeaning and depressing one which constantly thwarts the liberating process of women and offers them little to relish. Majority of his woman characters strive to squeeze some meaning out of their dismal existence their own ways in an attempt to make their living meaningful and bearable and add some value to their existence. Many of them – Laxmi, Saru, Taru, Kiran( Agnisnan) ---succumb or are made to succumb to the pressures. Only a few like Menoka, Jayanti, Kiran(Kolahal), and Bhagyawati stand out ,take heart to rebel and can withstand the onslaught of a powerful patriarchal socio-cultural system to a certain extent. They perhaps epitomize the ‘New Woman’ in a new wave of metamorphosis. Dr. Saikia seems to assert that the archetypal Indian woman can mould a new destiny for herself only when she becomes aware of the need to know her true self and understand her ‘essentiality’ in society---a conviction instantly reminiscent of the contemporary postcolonial feminist stance.
References
Books
1.Dasgupta, Chidananda : Seeing is Believing: Selected Writings on Cinema, Viking, Penguine Books India Pvt. Ltd. , New Delhi, 2008
2. Rajyadhyaksha, Ashish and Wellemen, Paul: Encyclopaedia of Indian Cinema, OUP, New Delhi, 1999
3. Rangooonwalla, Firoze: Indian Cinema, Clarion Books, New Delhi, 1983
4. Vasudevan, Ravi (ed): Making Meaning in Indian Cinema, OUP, New Delhi,2000
5. Deka, P.K.(ed) : Bhabendra Nath Saikiar Chalachitra(As), NRB Publications, Guwahati, 2004
6. Borpujari, Manoj and Kolita, Garima (ed):Perspectives on Assamese Cinema, Guwahati Cine Club, 2008
7. Cooke, Joanne and Morgan,Robin (ed.) :The New Women: A Motive Anthology on Women’s Libers, Fawcatt Book, 1970
9. Ashcroft, Bill: The Empire Writes Back: Theory and Practice in Post Colonial Literature, London: Routledge,1989.
10. De Beauvoir, Simone: The Second Sex ( trans & edited H.M. Parshley), New York: Vintage Books,1974.
Films
1. Abartan ( On the Run), 1993 ( VCDs)
2. Kolahal ( The Turmoil) 1988 (VCDs)
3. Itihas ( Exploration) 1995 (VCDs)
4. Agnisnan ( Ordeal) 1985 (NFAI)
5. Sarothi ( The Shelter) 1991 ( Guwahati Cine Club)
6. Anirban (The Vigil) ,1981 (LOK SABHA, DD)
7. Sandhyaraag ( The Cry of Twilight) 1977 ( NFAI)
2. “No, no….I do not need all that, I need just a shelter, work and food without being called a servant. I need nothing else.”--- Saru to Moti in Sandhyaraag
3. “I wanted to be a Sita. But a Sita could exist only when there is a Rama!”---Menoka in Agnisnan
The connoisseurs of serious Assamese films, who have fallen under the spell of Dr. Bhabendranath Saikia’s celluloid world, hardly fail to discern that an authentic microcosm of Indian woman as ‘the Other’, the marginalized entity, the victim of a patriarchal socio-cultural set-up flares up in his films .It seems he consciously strives to create a “new space” and shape a new “essentialist” identity for the traditional Indian woman who is inexorably caught up in the throes of an insensitive and callous patriarchal society which seeks to mythify her into certain ‘inessentialist’ archetypal images, and who is ironically unaware of her ‘inessentiality’. Indian women, he seems to assert, can mould a new destiny for themselves breaking the jinx of the archetypal image of the submissive, placid and pliant woman, only when they become aware of the need to know their true selves and understand their ‘essentiality’ in society.
Dr. Bhabendra Nath Saikia is a colossus among the contemporary Assamese writers and filmmakers. In the arena of modern Indian literature and films, he is one of the most powerful voices and one of the very few who have attempted to use literary and cinematic tool as a means for detached portrayal of social change and crucial socio-cultural issues without being a propagandist. His literary works and the films, most of which are based on his own literary works, have distinct artistic sensitivity and pulsation of life that are not quite common in the contemporary Assamese literature and Indian films. Here is a valiant and sensitive ‘modern man’ who has a flair for realism and who is, in spite of being a male himself, almost obsessed with the predicaments and dilemmas of Indian women and their often traumatic experiences and consequences in a traditionally defined socio-cultural and political set-up of male hegemony . He has a distinct predilection for the portrayal of the inner landscapes of his woman protagonists----their anguished cry of desolation and boredom, their neurotic loneliness in the midst of a crowd, their oceanic vacuity, their abysmal despair, their Hamletian vacillation in renouncing or accepting the catastrophic events of their lives as ‘Fate accomplice’, their frail and passive attempts to gain a voice and fulfilling identity and their rebellion against the forces that tend to stifle their spirit .Their struggles often culminate in some not-too-soothing ends. Most of his films do not have ‘to-live-happily ever-after’ kind of ends if not tragic and self-annihilating ones. In them, he portrays the socio-cultural transitions that India has undergone as he focuses on the incredible power of family and society and the relationships between the members of the family, paying close attention to women suppressed and moulded by conservative Indian society. Thus it is the woman, the ‘Other’ in postcolonial terms , the tainted , desolate, subdued entity in a callous society , the victim of a male-oriented hegemony that emerges as the cynosure in the thematic complexes of his major films. His probing into the sensibility and the inner workings of the minds of his woman characters provides a kind of microcosm of life where his major women characters can discern their infinite variety. And this alone establishes Dr. Bhabendra Nath Saikia as a veracious delineator of women. The present paper aims at bringing under microscope the slices of life that the female protagonists in his celluloid world live. The focus is on interpreting and analyzing how he portrays the predicaments and dilemmas, psychic tremours, painful ordeals, bruished feelings, frustrations and agonies, frail but relentless struggles of his major female characters in his films . The present paper intends to peep into the world of shattered dreams, thwarted hopes, tainted identity and morbid existences, and also the ‘flipper of hope’ that his women experience in life. Dr. Saikia’s films unveil before us the familiar world of Indian women----a world that relegates woman to a marginalized entity, a world marked by acute gender bias, a world which often turns out to be nothing less than a hell for the woman------a world where life continues, but living ends for her. It is a male world the callousness of which often shatters and thwarts the dreams and aspirations of Menoka, Kiran, Saru, Taru, Putoli, Laxmi and Jayanti, but it is where they are fated to fend for themselves or perish.
Few will deny Dr. Bhabendra Nath Saikia’s films, barring 'Sarothi' and 'Kalsandhya', are a cerebral and serious critique of the psyche and predicament of the archetypal Indian woman in a predominantly male-oriented society although he juxtaposes certain other crucial , socially relevant and cerebral themes with it in his films. Almost all of his women teeter on the edges of an 'inessentialist identity' which they are forced to embrace by the traditional male hegemony of the society. Paradoxically enough, though a male himself, Dr. Saikia, with an extraordinary insight into the female psyche, explores both the inner and outer worlds of his women. His attitude is one of compassion and understanding. His woman protagonist is neither a Saint Joan nor a Nora. But true to her real life , she always struggles in her reel life to reconcile to her fate, sometimes suffering meekly, at other times compromising with her debilitating circumstances, and at yet other times rebelling against the system . Consequently there flares up a series of woman protagonists in his films who at once catch our attention and make us introspect.
Lying at the core of Dr. B.N. Saikia’s debut film “Sandhyarag” is the menace of acute poverty that stagnates and threatens the very existence of rural masses in India. Though the film dwells on poverty in general in rural India , Dr. Saikia is apt to unveil before us how the woman folk suffers still more from uncertainty and terror of poverty in a male dominated society which not only restricts the free movement of women but also marginalizes their options. Putoli, her two daughters, Saru and Taru are three women trapped in the vortex of acute poverty and its resultant uncertainty and hopelessness. In their very childhood, Putoli had to send Saru and Taru to the nearby town to serve as maids. The problem of survival was thus solved amicably for a while. Both the sisters adapted well to their working environments and things went on smoothly for some years. Saru’s character is portrayed focusing on her essence and her psyche. We can discover instantly how the woman in her is constantly reeling under economic insecurity and its resultant uncertainty about life and future in general. Her mother and younger sister are no exception. And her sense of uncertainty and fear is well justified . Reluctant to bear the burden of two grown up girls ,the siblings are sent back home by their respective masters as they come of age. Here the gander disparity is more than evident. If Saru and Taru were boys, they would gain more in strength and acceptability with the process of growing up. But alas, they are girls! And girls experience the contrary in the male-dominated society in which they operate. They once more become hapless, wretched and insecure dogged by abject poverty and joblessness. The situation turns out to be still more deplorable for them as being in town, they could not learn any competence for works available in villages. When Saru was with Nandan Das’s family, she got close to Moti, the chauffeur of the family. Moti himself is a frail, pathetic figure who has been ruthlessly deserted by his wife for being impotent. Moti happens to visit Saru’s home on a fateful day as he has to bring his master to Saru’s village for a public meeting. After a long time , Saru and Taru get an opportunity to work as they are entrusted with the responsibility of cooking the feast for the guests coming from town. The guests are entertained well ,but Moti who was waiting in the car fo hi master is ignored. At night , hungry to death, Moti approaches Saru’s family, his old acquaintances for some food. But to his surprise, Saru sobs and breaks down in front of him---“Nothing to offer you. Not even a crumb of rice. You have gone without food only today, but we since yesterday. Please take me away………” Greatly baffled and almost shocked Moti reminds her of his worthlessness as a male, of the grim reality that his own wife deserted him for being impotent. But to a woman inexorably trapped in the vicious cycle of poverty and uncertainty, food security matters most; she is forced to sacrifice her all other desires----“No, no….I do not need all that, I need just a shelter, work and food without being called a servant. I need nothing else.” To astonish Moti still more, Taru and Putoli pray to him to take them as well with him. They are ready to do anything under the sun for Moti and Saru . Thus paradoxically, three sane and sensible women prostrate before a frail, insulted, humiliated male member of their society for their survival.
‘Anirban’ is Dr Saikia’s second feature film in which he dwells on a pretty cerebral and dainty facet of a common woman’s psyche. Though the film touchingly treats the mundane weal and woes of life that at times culminates in tragic consequences , Dr. Saikia’s probing into the psyche of his major woman character Bhagyawati instantly catches our attention. Sadness is all pervasive in the film and Rajani and Bhagyawati embody that pitiless, heart-rending sadness. Rajani and Bhagyawati were a childless couple for a long time. Not that Bhagyawati did not conceive . But under tragic circumstances, she lost her child three times either before birth or just after birth. Her tragedy adversely impinged on her body and mind . Her husband, though a sober and sedate person himself, had to take a lot of pain to attend on her, soothe her and bring her back to normal health. But then a girl child , Nisha ,was born and she survived. Nisha became the apple of her parents’ eyes. Nisha’s birth added new hue and colour to her life.With the advent of Nisha, Bhagyawati blossomed into an affectionate, caring, doting, responsible, and vigilant mother. When Nisha seemed to have an amorous affair of some sort with Dewakar, she was worried to death and acted promptly to curb that with her husband . But Bhagyawati’s bliss proved short-lived as Nisha suddenly died prematurely. The sudden demise of Nisha toppled Bhagyawati’s world again. But to our surprise, her desire to be a mother, probably a hidden , universal, and instinctive desire in every conventional woman, does not cease to exist. In spite of the tragic end of her only child, she does not wither as a mother this time . She now starts showering her motherly love and care on Diwakar, Nisha’s beloved. Bhagyawati along with her husband took part wholeheartedly in Diwakar’s marriage . To Bhagyawati, he is nothing short of her own son. Again, she showers the affection and care of a grandmother on Diwakar’s son . Every moment Bhagyawati’s motherly presence is tangible in the film. Bhagyawati , with all her selfless love, care, concern and sacrifices for her child and later for Diwakar , epitomizes the eternal mother figure. It is what distinguishes her in the conventional male-oriented society.
Menoka is the central character in Dr. B. N. Saikia’s much talked about film ‘ Agnisnan’ (Ordeal) partly based on his literary ‘tour de force’ ‘ Antareep’. The film is a gripping , cerebral tale of a woman’s ‘inessentialist identity’ and her daredevil attitude to assert her own independent will in a traditional society controlled and propelled by male hegemony. Menoka is a successful housewife who leaves no stone unturned to fit into the role her family and her society expect her to play. And she succeeds spectacularly in that archetypal role. She manages her household well, rears her children, waits on her husband and keeps him satisfied and happy. But even then her husband, an influential and rich person in the village, suddenly brings in a young girl, marries her and starts making love to her all before the eyes of Menoka totally ignoring her presence. Mohikanta does all that without showing any signs of compunction and caring for what his faithful wife would feel about it. He does all that as if he were privileged to do such an act. In a social set up where all the social customs, norms and traditions are framed to suit the male folk, Mohikanta’s act is looked upon as a natural occurrence. But Menoka feels insulted, humiliated and marginalized. She is muddled to death why Mohikanta got fed up with her, how he could do such a nefarious act without an iota of compunction. After all she did everything possible to appease him and keep him in good stead! And he too, seemed satisfied. Is it merely for sexual gratification? He finds her world shattered, her essence , her pride as a conventionally successful woman badly tainted. She can never justify Mohikanta’s act, and resolves to set things right in her own way. If Mohikanta is independent to assert his will, so is she. She would avenge herself upon callous and unconscientious Mohikanta and the social system that nurtures people like him by asserting her independence. She is also entitled to doing what Mohikanta is as both of them are members of the same society. But Menoka knows very well how hostile the value system of the patriarchal society is to woman emancipation and equality. After going through a series of acute mental conflict, she decides to pay Mohikanta his own coins. For the purpose, she chooses Madan, not-too-respectable a man in the village, in fact, a thief, but respectful and compassionate to her. She establishes a rapport with Madan , goes physical with him , and gets pregnant . When Mohikanta comes to know it and flings at her character, irked Menoka cries out ---“I wanted to be a Sita. But a Sita could exist only when there is a Rama!” Thus Menoka, a faithful conformist to the archetypal image of the woman in a traditionally patriarchal society, breaks free from its atrocious bondage to register a protest against a value system that favours only the man folk.
Kiran is the other important woman character in ‘Agnisnan’. A meek, mild, shadowlike character, Kiran is reminiscent of a typical conformist woman in a male-dominated society. She is as it were born to be the victim of the male hegemony. She has not much of a choice about what happens to her. She has to be the so-called second wife , almost a concubine of an influential male member of the society. But she has learnt to adapt to the values and expectations of her society and can easily cope with it without much effort. She naturally lacks any sense of self-respect and rebellious spirit. She has never thought about her own desires and her own essence, her ‘essentialist identity’ and tries to give meaning to her life by conforming to what her society determines for her. She has no problem embracing the subverting status of ‘Other’.
Dr. B.N.Saikia’s “Kolahal”(The Turmoil) is another emotionally satisfying and intellectually stimulating film that draws its blood from its central woman protagonist Kiran, a lower class, poor housewife and a mother , and a conventional woman. Kiran is a typical average woman whose world is shaped and moulded by what dominates the world of such a woman in the conventional patriarchal society----a husband, a house and her children. She is happy in her own way with her husband and her son , Moti, in spite of a pretty humble life. There she lives in a substandard ,feebly-built hut in a slum-like ambience with her husband and son constantly fighting poverty and uncertainty. But then her husband suddenly disappears with the promise that he would be back soon. The same old story is repeated ---the story of an innocent, faithful , credulous ,humble wife duped and dumped by a cunning ,shrewd casanova . Credulous Kiran waits for her husband’s return, and all but Kiran know that he is not going to return . Consequently Kiran faces all that a lonely, young and attractive woman does in a male-dominated society. Quite a few tries to woo and seduce her . Some tease and harass her. A few even proposes to live in with her. But she goes undaunted, unfazed never succumbing to such pressures and temptations. She takes recourse to Moti, her adolescent son, as a psychological shelter. To cope with the escalating economic crunch, she starts working in a rice godown. There too,she faces the same exploitative, harassing environment. All of a sudden ,Moti is killed in an accident. She totally breaks down. The handyman who was responsible for Moti’s killing tries to get close to Kiran. Though a compassionate, good-natured and trustworthy fellow, the guilt conscience and pity of the male-chauvinist in him provoke him to do something to save the hapless woman from her fathomless despair. Kiran at first connives at his advances, but gradually she can see his difference from other males she has encountered in her life. Her faith is restored gradually. She decides to take a chance, not out of any amorous feelings or biological needs, but out of an innate desire to mother forth another Moti and to regain a sense of security. Kiran, though an ordinary woman to the core, speaks of the dignity, integrity, motherly instincts, security consciousness and conformist attitude of a woman in a traditionally patriarchal socio-cultural set up . She is not bold and powerful enough to undo the archetypal image of a woman. But she is prudent enough to reconcile to her destiny amicably . She is adaptative enough to ensure that she survives there with some dignity, recognition and security by being a mother, a housewife, and a homemaker again. Even in the teeth of boundless darkness and despair, she does not lose sight of the reality of a woman in a patriarchal society and decides to take on it her own way. Kiran’s is the instinctive strategy of a woman to fit into the archetypal image approved of by such a society .
After Menoka, Jayanti in ‘Abartan’ (On the Run) is perhaps Dr. Bhabendra Nath Saikia’s second female protagonist who shows the rare gusts to exorcise herself of the ghost of the patriarchal society’s value system that tends to reduce a woman to an insignificant archetypal image. Interestingly, as a sympathetic, understanding and bold male joins hands with Menoka in her mission, Parimol Dutta, another bold, compassionate person stands by Jayanti to enable her to overcome her predicament. Jayanti is the central female character in Dr. Bhabendra Nath Saikia’s film, ‘Abartan’ ( On the Run). When she makes her first appearance in the film in the very first sequence, she is already a crowd- puller, a household name as an actress performing for a reputed Mobile Theatre Troupe. She is smart, glamourous, popular and scandalous as well. Though in her mid thirties, she still looks pretty young, energetic, and attractive. But she is already tired, exhausted, fed up and worn out at heart after thirteen long years in theatre. Jayanti took to a professional acting career not by choice but by compulsion. Finding no other way to fend for herself with some dignity and in an attempt to get away from the sneering gazes of gossip-mongers , she took to that career almost as the last resort. And she could do well as she had always showed great acting prowess during her school and college days and grabbed a number of awards in that field as an amateur. Her beauty , smartness and agreeability added to her popularity. In the very early days of her youth, she dared to break away from the typical mould of the lower middle class woman .Unlike such a woman, she was rather a nonconformist of some sort. Much to the astonishment and dismay of many around her, she took part actively in students’ agitation, political activities , mixed up freely with her male counterparts, participated in drama competitions and various other socio-cultural activities without inhibitions-----things which were more than enough to put her good name as a conventional girl at stake. She thus trod the territory forbidden for a ‘good’, respectable woman and had its retribution. She became butt of rumours and scandals---- a fact that wiped out her marital prospects . She did not do anything that her male friends did not do. But while she lost her good name and thereby virtually everything, they being males lost nothing. Rather most of them manipulated the system to serve their own interests and established themselves . Exploited, used, humiliated, Jayanti was left alone with a stained image. After having lost her good name and finding no other viable and respectable ‘modus vivendi’ to fall back on, she took up an acting career in commercial mobile theatres. She easily clicked as an actress by virtue of her talent and beauty. Along with it continued her carefree attitude to life. Already a scandalous figure, she capitalized on her glamour and fan-following and started indulging in extramarital affairs without inhibitions . She was always under scanner for her carefree life style, her bold attitude to promiscuities and her utter nonchalance to the societal norms of decency and respectability . But Jayanti did not bow down . She led her personal life her way but never shrank from her familial duties. Her family lived on her and Jayanti , though aware of their selfishness , never deserted them. It is at this juncture Jayanti comes across Porimal Dutta, a frank, good-natured and attractive Govt. officer who, in spite of knowing Jayanti’s past and present, falls for this outspoken and bold woman smitten by her daredevil attitude, her honesty, her beauty and her magnetism. He proposes to marry her. Jayanti is shocked at first. In a society which has already branded her as a woman of dubious morals, she can not imagine a respectable person like him proposing to marry a woman of her sort. She is in the habit of dealing with men dying to go to bed with her, but a perfectly sane man falling in love with her and proposing to marry her is nothing short of a miracle to her. Porimal, who has already led a very dissipated and promiscuous life and is now fed up and exhausted with all that and wants stability and peace , finds a perfect match in her----matured, sober, frank, bold , and worn out, experienced and prudent like himself. But to Jayanti, it is a really arduous task to say ‘yes’ to Porimal and tear away from her present world as two formidable challenges confront her---- she has already shunned the world of Porimal for ever after much effort and to regain the mental preparedness to re-enter it scares and baffles her beyond measure , and secondly, she is bound to the theatre group for several years by a legal agreement to work with it. Finally Jayanti decides to recreate her own world and turn over a new leaf with new promises of respect and dignity . She joins hands with Porimal to tide over the hurdles and sustain her world. Jayanti is an emblem of the ‘new woman’ who has the gusts not only to withstand the jolt of the traditional patriarchal society but also to take it in her stride and even nurture her own world, if given a chance in the face of such odds.
Laxmi, a young and attractive girl emerges as the cynosure in Dr. Saikia’s last Assamese feature film ‘Itihas’( The Exploration). An innocent, innocuous and hardworking girl, Laxmi faces all the seamy aspects of life in her apparently uneventful life for no fault of hers. For her family, the most formidable challenge is that of survival . After being almost abandoned by her elder brother ,she has to take upon herself the burden of supporting her family and go through fire and water to do that in a fair way. To sustain herself and her family, she starts doing domestic works in a few households in her neighbourhood. A lonely, young ,attractive, and frail woman, she faces all those hazardous and harassing experiences that such a woman faces in a conventional male society. Gradually she gets accustomed to her ambience and her reputation gets stained although she remains integrated and morally scrupulous at heart. Her despair culminates in total gloom when even Madhu, her beloved and the only source of solace in her otherwise dreary and lacklustre life, also dumps her . Life still continues but living ends for her. To protect herself from anti-social forces, she finally has to take shelter in the old well in her neighbourhood that she has been using for years. Laxmi’s death entails the administration to explore the well for the last time and what is unveiled is the sign of the decayed, dirty, and seamy sides of the so-called civilized society. Though it remains rather implicit, the callous, insensitive society to the innocent woman manifests itself. Laxmi’s story is the story of that innocent, average , wretched woman who falls victim to the norms of a society hostile to woman empowerment----a society that tends to stifle and marginalize the woman and make her life miserable.
Although Dr. Saikia refuses to show allegiance to any contemporary postcolonial feminist critical theory, he seems to be well acquainted with the ‘inessentiality’ of the woman in the traditional patriarchal Indian society. For, his literary pieces as well as his films are palpably infested with women who again and again confront their marginalized identity as ‘Other’ and its traumatic and tantalizing effects. Quite tangibly, one of the central concerns of Dr. Bhabendra Nath Saikia in most of his films is the need for and the importance of the emancipation of the woman. The world of women as depicted in his fiction and films is mostly a regressive, chaotic, demeaning and depressing one which constantly thwarts the liberating process of women and offers them little to relish. Majority of his woman characters strive to squeeze some meaning out of their dismal existence their own ways in an attempt to make their living meaningful and bearable and add some value to their existence. Many of them – Laxmi, Saru, Taru, Kiran( Agnisnan) ---succumb or are made to succumb to the pressures. Only a few like Menoka, Jayanti, Kiran(Kolahal), and Bhagyawati stand out ,take heart to rebel and can withstand the onslaught of a powerful patriarchal socio-cultural system to a certain extent. They perhaps epitomize the ‘New Woman’ in a new wave of metamorphosis. Dr. Saikia seems to assert that the archetypal Indian woman can mould a new destiny for herself only when she becomes aware of the need to know her true self and understand her ‘essentiality’ in society---a conviction instantly reminiscent of the contemporary postcolonial feminist stance.
References
Books
1.Dasgupta, Chidananda : Seeing is Believing: Selected Writings on Cinema, Viking, Penguine Books India Pvt. Ltd. , New Delhi, 2008
2. Rajyadhyaksha, Ashish and Wellemen, Paul: Encyclopaedia of Indian Cinema, OUP, New Delhi, 1999
3. Rangooonwalla, Firoze: Indian Cinema, Clarion Books, New Delhi, 1983
4. Vasudevan, Ravi (ed): Making Meaning in Indian Cinema, OUP, New Delhi,2000
5. Deka, P.K.(ed) : Bhabendra Nath Saikiar Chalachitra(As), NRB Publications, Guwahati, 2004
6. Borpujari, Manoj and Kolita, Garima (ed):Perspectives on Assamese Cinema, Guwahati Cine Club, 2008
7. Cooke, Joanne and Morgan,Robin (ed.) :The New Women: A Motive Anthology on Women’s Libers, Fawcatt Book, 1970
9. Ashcroft, Bill: The Empire Writes Back: Theory and Practice in Post Colonial Literature, London: Routledge,1989.
10. De Beauvoir, Simone: The Second Sex ( trans & edited H.M. Parshley), New York: Vintage Books,1974.
Films
1. Abartan ( On the Run), 1993 ( VCDs)
2. Kolahal ( The Turmoil) 1988 (VCDs)
3. Itihas ( Exploration) 1995 (VCDs)
4. Agnisnan ( Ordeal) 1985 (NFAI)
5. Sarothi ( The Shelter) 1991 ( Guwahati Cine Club)
6. Anirban (The Vigil) ,1981 (LOK SABHA, DD)
7. Sandhyaraag ( The Cry of Twilight) 1977 ( NFAI)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)