QUEEN’S ROAD: Girish Kasaravalli's cinema, though inspired by European neo-realism, is richly local, well-known film critic Manu Chakravarthy has said.
He spoke to City Express ahead of a festival featuring the films of Girish Kasaravalli, opening Saturday.
An English professor, Manu Chakravarthy has edited Culturing Realism, an anthology about the four-time National Award-winner.
H
e is scheduled to participate in a discussion on the filmmaker's period film Thaayi Saheba on Sunday.
Excerpts from an interview:
What place does Kasaravalli hold in Indian and world cinema?
At Bharatiya Vidya Bhavan
A retrospective festival featuring filmmakers Girish Kasaravalli's works, organised by Bharatiya Vidya Bhavan, Race Course Road, kicks off today. Eleven of the auteur's films will be screened over the next five days, interspersed with discussions.
With Pather Panchali, Satyajit Ray introduced neo-realism into Indian cinema. This was not a mere transposition of European neo-realism, not blind imitation. It has been done aesthetically, and set in the local context of Bengal. Kasaravalli has brought this closer home, making it richly local. I use the term local as opposed to national or international.
The neo-realism that the two filmmakers, Ray and Kasaravalli, have explored, their images and narrative structures are different from the European. It is much like Indian literature in the bhashas — it resembles the neo-realism of the Latin American or African cultures.
Do you see a shift in his concerns over the years?
I would not say that there has been a shift in his concerns. I would say that they have evolved, just like (U R) Ananthamurthy's.
Ghatashraddha (1977), like the novel, is about the changing nature of the agrahara in the Nehruvian period. Tabarana Kathe (1987) talks about the bureaucracy, about how many of the political structures we have are from the colonial period. As much as we say they kill us, we sustain them. Thayi Saheba (1997) is not feminist, but it introduces a new kind of feminism, not scholarly, but one based on the sheer experience of the women. Kurmavatara, his latest, portrays changing social structures. So I would say that you can see his concerns evolving in direct relation to the Indian polity.
What do you have to say about his three non-feature films?
Usually, the zamindars are portrayed as cruel monsters, rapists, and the workers as so oppressed that they lack any imagination. Kasaravalli has moved away from these binaries. Without justifying any of their actions, Kagodu Satyagraha brings out the complex structures of the feudal system.
Ananthamurthy, Not a Biography but a Hypothesis is an intellectual journey in which their — the two creative thinkers, the filmmaker and his subject — ideas resonate. This also happens to be the journey of Karnataka and India.
The documentary on Adoor Gopalakrishnan is one filmmaker reflecting on another, in another language, through images.