G Aravindan

G Aravindan



Born in Kottayam, Kerala, G Aravindan was well known to the readers of Kerala through his cartoon serial Cheriya Manushyarum Valya Lokavum (Small Men and the Big World), which appeared in the Mathrubhoomi journal during the early 1960s, even before he started with films. The cartoon serial chronicled the adventures of its characters, Ramu and Guruji.

No work of art directly or indirectly change society or human beings. However, cinema has the power to influence the human mind. Talking about good cinema….I believe that any act of a human being committed with sincerity and conviction is good. So is the case with cinema, if it is born out of one's conviction, it cannot be but be good.

Aravindan was part of a group of modernist artist based in Kozhikode, represented particularly by artist Devan, playwright Thikkodiyan and writer Pattathuvila Karunakaran. Aravindan's first film, Uttarayanam came out of this group, produced by Pattathuvila and story written by Thikkodiyan. The early films of Aravindan, as part of this group were highly influenced by the spiritualism of satirist Sanjayan and the mystic paintings of K C S Pankcker.

Aravindan kept changing his cinematic forms consistently during his film career spanning almost fifteen years, from his first film Uttarayanam (1974) to his last film Vasthuhara (1990). Aravindan successfully went beyond the limits and styles of filmmaking created by the new wave filmmakers of that time. This journey towards new facets of narrative included current incidents, history, myths and traditional stories. He also occasionally directed music for other filmmakers.

Aravindan took active part in theatre movements in Kerala. He associated with playwright Srikantan Nair and later helped start the Navarangam and Sopanam theatre groups.

Aravindan died on 16th January, 1991.



Filmography:

Uttarayanam
Kanchana Seeta
Thampu
Kummatty
Estheppan
Pokkuveyil
Chidambaram
Oridathu
Marattam
Unni
Vasthuhara





Also read :
Filmmaker as an Intuitive Artist: Interview with Aravindan


The seventies witnessed the emergence of Aravindan as a major filmmaker in the firmament of Indian cinema. Along with Adoor Gopalakrishnan, he has placed Malayalam cinema in a position of pre-eminence in the country. Painter, cartoonist, musician, theatre director and filmmaker, Aravindan has been engaged in multifarious activities over the years. An autodidact, Aravindan's films are marked by an entirely original approach to cinema with perhaps the least influence from film theories and various schools of filmmaking.

This interview with Aravindan was conducted by Chandradasan for 'Deep Focus' in 1989.

Chandradaasan: You directed your first film, UTTARAYANAM in 1974. Can you tell us a little about the period before that and how the experiences of those years influenced the present film maker that you are?
G. Aravlndan: I was interested in cinema from the very beginning - my childhood days, my student days - as far back as I can remember. I saw a lot of films with my friends and I used to read whatever available literature on films and discuss them whenever possible. However, it was only after the International Film Festival in 1954, that I got a chance to view films like RASHOMON, and BICYCLE THIEVES. These films were different. It was like a revelation... It opened up another possibility, another side of cinema, another sensibility, which did not exist until then... Well, I passed B. Sc. with distinction. My subject was Botany. I got a good job with the Rubber Board, and hence discontinued my academic pursuits. During my years with the Rubber Board I had to work on different locations in Kerala like Calicut, Kothamangalam, Trivandrum etc. Those days I used to paint in oil and watercolours - most of them were portraits and paintings of animals. I had also' taken part in group exhibitions of paintings. Another fascination was music - in my childhood. I was 'introduced to classical music, which I studied for a long time. While working in Calicut I learned Hindustani from Sharat Chandra Rai.

A good cinema is like any other works of art, like painting, dance, theatre, literature etc. No work of art directly or indirectly change society or human beings. However cinema has the power to influence the human mind. Talking about good cinema... I believe that any act of a human being committed with sincerity and conviction is good. So is the case with cinema, if it is born out of one's conviction, it cannot but be good.

How was the family atmosphere... was it encouraging?
I had a very free family atmosphere. My father, (advocate Govindan Nair) was a writer himself. He has never restricted me in any way. Though I used to go home several times late in the night - mostly after seeing films, he never scolded me. I used to read a bit too. Though I did not understand them completely, those days I acquainted myself with Sartre and Camus. I was also familiar with many well known literary figures of Kerala, who I met either at home or through the Sahitya Parishat. Some of the famous contemporary writers in Kerala today, like 0 N V Kurupu, Thirunallur Karunakaran, Sugatha Kumari, N Mohanan etc. are my classmates.

Adoor Gopalakrishnan came back from the Film Institute and started the Chitralekha Film Society. I co-operated with that attempt - I think it was in 1962 or in 1963. It was at this time that an All India Writers Conference was organised by FACT in Ernakulam. It was a very big event. Nothing like that has happened before or after that in India. The whole programme was organised by M K K. Nair and M Govindan. Adoor was incharge of the Film section and I was incharge of the painting section. After this I started a Film Society in Kottayam, then later when I was transferred to Calicut I started another Film Society in Calicut. I did not miss any Hollywood Film that got released in the town. My association with film gradually grew and continued on these lines. .

When did you start drawing cartoons?
I used to draw from the student days and a few were published in some small magazines. In 1961, I sent some to the 'Mathrubhoomi' Weekly. They published that. That year, Shri N V Krishna Variyar, the Editor of 'Mathrubhoomi' asked me to contribute regularly to the weekly. From then for a period of 18 years continuously I have done cartoons for 'Mathrubhoomi' under the title of "Small Men (people) and Big World': I discontinued it only because I was not finding time to send the cartoons every week on time for publication.

Now we see your cartoons in Kalakaumudi weekly under the title 'A Birds eye view'
That is not a regular assignment. A regular assignment may not be possible for me. It is only once in a while when I get time that I do cartoons.

You also seem to have a keen interest in Drama?
Yes -I used to see a lot of theatre in my childhood. However, a more serious approach to theatre developed in me because of Shri C N Sreekantan Nair. In Kottayam we formed a Theatre Association called 'Navarangam'. The members used to meet every Sunday for play reading, discussions and to learn a little acting. That interest in drama still continues. Today I am associated with the 'Sopanam' theatre under the guidance of Kavalam Narayana Panikar. Though my role in it is minimal, I am interested in the cultural activity of the 'Sopanam'.

How did you move from regular cartooning and drama to cinema?
My first film was a sheer accident. I was in Calicut involved, in the film society and had been staying alone. My room was a kind of 'den' for friends to come together for a chat and a drink etc. Theeukodayil had prepared a script and all of us were trying hard to get it financed for making a film. Suddenly one day Pattathuvila Karunakaran said that he will finance the film, if I, Aravindan, directed it. I told him that I had no formal academic qualification for directing a film; All I had was some ideas through seeing films and reading about them. Pattathuvila said: 'that is enough'. And that is how I became a filmmaker.


Has composing cartoons, the way you developed cartoon characters, helped you in some way while shooting and directing films?
I have not felt anything like that. To tell you the truth, my cartoons are not such meticulously executed works. Most of the time one draws and gives in the work at the last moment. I had simplified the whole thing to, two characters in a frame with a visual dimension. Earlier I used to place the characters against a very clear backdrop. Later it became just two characters with a few lines here and there. I don't think I have drawn much from this kind of work for directing films. There is also no relationship between the camera/cinema frame and cartoon frames. I do not essentially believe that if you are a painter, a composer or a cartoonist it will help you in making films.

Can you tell us a little about your methodology of directing films? Do you prepare a detailed script-sketch of each shot?
I do it in either of the two ways: some times everything is planned before. But even then there is no elaborate shooting script. Most of the time I work with a loosely knit shooting script. Several times a lot of changes are made and some shots are totally abandoned. My scripts usually have the flexibility to take care of such eventualities. I don't have pre-fixed frame. I have not felt the need for such planning. In fact I am afraid of such a pre-conceived frame and doubt its advantages. Compositions might be bad for making a film. The shots can become rigid and the composition very formalistic. I feel a flexible approach in these matters bring better results... Well, different filmmakers adopt different methods. No one can say which is better and which is right. This has to be left to each individuals' taste.

Perhaps you are conscious about the colours you want and carry within you an overall idea about the kind of shots you are going to make, which allows you flexibility within your script.
Perhaps... But in MARATTAM my film under production, I have not used any colours consciously. I have used costumes and colours which were around and available. I have not decided that a particular character will have this or that costume or this or that colour.

Yet there is a lot of green and red (colours of the earth) in your films.
Red earth and greenery is what we are surrounded with. I have tried to use nature more than a backdrop only in KANCHANA SEETA. In KANCHANA SEETA nature is a character.

Though you say that you used nature as a backdrop there seems to be a lot of it in your films for example in the film POKKUVEYIL, the use of landscape in twilight.
I have used landscape in POKKUVEYIL to create a required mood. No landscape is used as characterisation.

However, when I watch your films, I cannot but get a feeling that the abundant use and depiction of landscape and nature make them a little more than mere backdrop...it seems to have another function... another purpose...
I have heard many speaking about it and seen a few writing about it in that way. There was no conscious effort from my side to make the landscape carry another function.

In the period between 1960 and 1974, you said that you were engaged primarily with paintings, film societies, drawing cartoons etc. I have heard that you were also interested in murals.
Yes,... my artist friend, A Ramachandran came back from Shantiniketan. His thesis was a study on murals, and I was moving around with him helping him in whatever way I could. Because of that I got a chance to learn about the characteristics of murals and differences between them. The thesis was a major work by A Ramachandran.

Apart from the knowledge you gained from the study of murals you seem to be influenced by its narrative style - which is essentially flexible; its loose dramatic structure, stretches and contracts space according to requirement. The character portrayal is also done in a similar fashion. What scenes and which character should assume prominence is totally determined by the mood of the artist.
This we find not only in murals, but it is a feature of our tradition. It is there in our paintings and sculptures, which are not three-dimensional. This is not peculiar only to India but is the basic characteristic of South East Asian region. The depiction of the eyes, the lines, the figure proportions etc., is totally different from that of the Western conception.

This flexibility of characterisation is there in every art form of ours, e.g. in our way of story telling; the intense moments and climaxes are left to the mood of the storyteller. With the result the storyteller sometimes highlights relatively ordinary episodes as the central events.
Yes, this is not only true of our story telling styles, but also of our stories; take for example, the Panchatantram stories. They flow spontaneously without having a unifying structure.

This kind of a narrative style seems to be a special feature of your films as well, especially of the films ESTHEPPAN, POKKUVEYIL, KUMMATTY. You have already told us that you don't have a formal training in directing films nor do you maintain any rigid standards. You are not following particularly any film theory in your films. Is it because you have accepted the narrative style of our tradition? Are they an effort to develop a film language from our cultural tradition?
I have not deliberately thought about such issues. The departures made from the Western ways are not conscious either. The Western ways of character analysis, introducing conflict and tension and the foreline, which controls all such notions does not go with our way of thinking, our tradition. Cinema is a lately developed Western idiom. It had a form as soon as it was born. How I have freed myself from these Western influences is not something that I have thought about. Nor am I sure about whether I have come out of Western influences. I don't base myself on any ideology or theory and analyse the how and the why of it all. Maybe this was possible because I have not undergone a formal training in filmmaking. Many influences are there. What I have seen and heard; what I have read; what friends discussed with me.

I want to go back and ask you another question. Do you like our classics like Kathakali?
Every year, there used to be a Kathakali performance at the temple until daybreak. I used to watch them casually and was not seriously interested in it. As I said earlier my main interest was music.

When and how did you get interested in Indian philosophy?
I cannot say that I have an in-depth knowledge of Indian philosophy. The basic concepts of Indian philosophy are part of all of us. Something that we live and breathe everyday. This interest in Indian philosophy was born and grew with my reading habit. Within Indian philosophy what fascinated me most was Buddhism of which I have read more. My association with Jiddu Krishnamurthy also helped in deepening my interest and sensibilities.

Well, I asked you this because your films are closely linked to Indian philosophy and tradition...
Mine is not a conscious effort. I very much like people who make departures from the mainstream-people who are critical of the dominant way of thinking, taste, and habits. I try listening to them to understand their flight from reality. Some of them make some kind of a departure from the mainstream but keep an active link with it. Some make the departures and live it out - the yet to be. I observe these things. These form my knowledge and my works reflect the knowledge, the feelings, the dilemmas, I have absorbed.

Your films carry a mysticism intrinsically linked to Nature. From the film UTHARAYANAM to ORIDATH, this is visible. Perhaps we can leave out ORIDATH. It is different from other films. ORIDATH deals with the transformation and convulsions of a village society due to an event, In all other films it is individuals and individual conflicts which are central, for instance, UTHARAYANAM, towards the end, the voyage into the forest, the meeting with the old woman, her guileless laughter, her kindness, and the mask which is burnt in the fire...; the title CHIDAMBARAM, the journey of Shankaran, Shankaran's internal conflict, his effort to re-establish himself into the routine of life, his failures, the doctor's advise to him to read the Gita, his haunting conscience and encounters with friends and strangers and finally, his entry into the Chidambaram temple where his elements blend and fuse into the invincibility of the temple. This search for the inviolable and eternal by the individual in the essences of Nature seems to be at the core of your films. There seems to be a continuity in the search for the spiritual in the realms of the ordinary and mundane... That is why I repeat the question.
I have not done anything consciously. How it is like that... I don't know. I was interested in the kind of issues you are talking about quite early in life. Though not very seriously, like a lot of youngsters, I thought of becoming a Sanyasi (pause) Perhaps I could have. There were possibilities…once I had decided seriously.

When did you get attracted to Buddhism?
I got attracted to Buddhism when working at Kothamangalam. I had to travel a lot to different estates as an Inspector from the Rubber Board. Yet, I was terribly alone...isolated… but for the presence of an artist friend... It was sometime in the fifties or early sixties. This is the context in which Buddhism fascinated me.

How did you respond to the social and political questions and changes of that time? After all it was a period of great political ferment in Kerala. The formation of the first government of the Communist Party of India, the subsequent development of opposition to it, which is generally termed as "the liberation" struggle and the dismissal of the Communist Government by the Centre etc.
I was not an activist. But my emotional response was intense. Some of the activists of the Communist movement were my friends. During the student days Shri.D M Pottakkad had stayed with me- this revolutionary and writer was being hunted by the police then. As a government employee, I could not act openly, so there were limitations. While I was positively sympathetic to the Communist movement, I was not a Party activist.

After that you went through a period of cynicism, which is clearly evident in your cartoon series, 'Ramu and Guruji'. How did it happen?
Ramu and Guruji are fictional characters. They never lived nor are they derived with reference to anyone. They are just concepts. The cynicism had a very definite social basis - the post independence socio-political realities, the rising expectations of the people, the poverty and unemployment, the double standards, the denied opportunities, (the witch hunting of communists for instance), difficulties in getting admission into the universities and colleges. I think this cynicism was shared by a lot of youngsters of the time...it is clearly reflected in the literature, the stories, and poems of the period...

Well, the beginning of this cynicism was evident in the cartoon series "Cheriya Manushyarum Valiya lokaum" (small people and big world). What one sees is a continuity and growth of this thinking.
When I started the cartoon series, it was just a situation of an unemployed youth. Later I thought this young man should have a character. So he became a sensitive young man. Subsequently many other characters like 'Ramu and Guruji' began to grow and get corrupted a bit by worldly wisdom. Then began a self-justification process and a willingness to adjust with the social realities. Thus the character 'Ramu' was slowly developing.

I know you also as a play director. One of the best plays I have seen is AVANAVAN KADAMBA directed by you. Have you directed any other plays?
Well, I directed KADAMBA after my first film. It was in 1976 or 1977. Before that, in 1964, I had directed C N Sreekantan Nair's play KALI (Anger) for a professional troupe. It was a disaster. The audience reacted terribly and the play had to be stopped half way.

One can say that KALI was the first experimental play in Malayalam. Why do you think it turned out to be a disaster?
KALI had too many limitations. First of all it was not suited for a professional troupe. Secondly when the professional troupe was staging, it turned out that it could not be 'professionally experimental'. I think there were problems in the script of the play itself. I think Shri C N Sreekantan Nair wanted to revise the play.

Can you tell us about direction AVANAVAN KADAMBA? What was the approach you adopted?
I cannot say that the play was solely directed by me. I evolved with the effort and contributions of a number of a people, like for instance, the playwright Kavalam Narayana Panikar. We also had a number of very good artists like Nedumudi Venu, Jaganathan, Gopi, Natarajan, KunjupilIai and others. Shri Paramashivan helped us with the choreography. Everybody had agreed to stage the play in the open instead of on a stage. For this purpose, I prepared a general outline based on the play, with a chart of formations, groupings, choreography etc. AVANAVAN KADAMBA initiated, for the first time in Malayalam theatre, a process of using folk form elements. We were not using folk forms as they are. The effort was to fuse various folk elements in the movements, chanting, narrative techniques, steps and rhythms to evolve a totally new form. A lot of suggestions and contributions facilitated this process. I was coordinating these efforts.

Let me come back to films. You said that you made your films based on your experience. Were you influenced by any particular film theory/concept?
I don't think I was influenced by any particular school of thought. What influenced me more was theatre and music. We are, I feel, working with a totally Western idiom, using the same techniques and the same chemistry. Can we evolve a new form, new sensibility using the same? Ketan Mehta has tried it in BHAVANI BHAVAI. This is something that we have to try. Using that idiom to evolve a form of our own is not easy. I have tried this in MARATOM my new film.

BHAVANI BHAVAI is evidently influenced by Jansco's film concept and camera work?
It is possible. These are the initial stages, the beginnings... there is a reliance on East European style. He also used Bhavai theatre in that film.

What do you think of NOKKUKUTHI directed by Mankada Ravi Varma?
I have not had an opportunity to see that film.

Talking about film theory and criticism, John Abraham once said that the film critic's approach to cinema is rooted in the literary tradition, while what we actually need is a visual approach.
What John said is right. The main reason for such an approach is that most of our film critics are also literary critics - some of them being writers themselves. In cinema as well as in theatre, this is the state of affairs. It is sad that what they write becomes the last word. Their notions and tastes are determined by literary excellences, and literary standards. Such film comments become superficial and external to cinema. Only music and painting have so far evaded the dominating clutches of the writers. A new language of film writing seems to be gradually emerging.

What is your idea of good cinema?
A good cinema is like any other works of art, like painting, dance, theatre, literature etc. No work of art directly or indirectly change society or human beings. However cinema has the power to influence the human mind. Talking about good cinema... I believe that any act of a human being committed with sincerity and conviction is good. So is the case with cinema, if it is born out of one's conviction, it cannot but be good.

UTTARAYANAM
(Throne of Capricorn)



I would like to ask some questions specifically about each of your works. We did have some discussion generally on form and content. You had already stated that you don't have a formalistic approach to film making. Therefore if I ask you about why you used a particular colour in a particular shot or why you edited a shot in that particular way, I suppose it may not be relevant.
Yes, you are right. I don't think, one can attribute any given meaning to a form. e.g. to say that a given colour in a given shot and situation means specifically a meaning, a value, is irrelevant. If the colour red means, blood, danger and revolution that will remind us only of Velichappadu.

According to belief, within the sun's cycle, the best movement of the sun is uttarayanam - which is the time the sun moves to the north. Symbolically this becomes Ravi's own uttarayanam i.e.-a journey or movement into the forest - where he finds his peace/reconciliation.


The central theme (issue) of your first film UTTARAYANAM is unemployment, as also reminiscences of some people who took active part in the independence movement. What was your approach to the very contemporary issues dealt with in the film?
The scriptwriter Thikkodyian is a person very committed to social and political issues. He has been active in the 'movement' too. But I don't believe that one can fulfil one's social commitment by shooting a film, I do not think that with one film we are going to change society or influence the thinking of the people much. What I am arriving at is, that the subject, the content of a film is not central. The superficial sentiments expressed through the theme cannot really influence the people. What goes into the human mind is the subtleties and it is that which ticks.

In the last scene of the film, Ravi (the main character) goes to the forest, where he meets with an old woman. This character seems to have transformed Ravi so much that he removes his mask and throws it into the fire.
I had conceived the character Ravi as a person who was unsure about returning from the forest - this is evident at the point when he stands at the entrance to the forest thinking about what to do.

Later he meets with the elderly woman and they understand each other, perfectly. Here the quality of innocence predominates for it is there (in the film) that Ravi smiles for the first time. This is because he could spontaneously respond to the smile of the old lady with whom he could identify his own state of being. In our context, fire is purifying: Throwing the mask into the fire where the old woman was warming herself was an act of purification, on which note I ended my film.

I do not think it will be relevant to ask what he will do after the purification! What I would like to ask though is that, inspite of your emphasis on Indian tradition, you have not become ritualistic. Kurosawa for instance is a film maker who carves out characters from the Samurai tradition and the treatment of the characters e.g. the way they move, talk, draw their swords etc. are very ritualistic, shorn of any flexibility. In comparison, your treatment of tradition is neither religious nor ritualistic. Can we call it humanistic or romantic?
Since Kurosawa was born in a Samurai family, their movements and rituals are in his blood. But every ritual has its rigidity; each act has its signs and codes. This does not go with my concept of cinema. Flexibility is of utmost importance to me.

In this film you have also brought in political activists, a group of extremists and a master who can be called Gandhian.
They were characters from real life. The extremist Achu, in UTHARAYANAM is Kunjiraman Kidavu, who has been involved in the Pizhalur bombing case. Kelappan, the father of Kunjiraman was a Gandhian. Kunjiraman was there with us for the entire shooting.

We shot those sequences with a lot of real ism, with a great deal of accuracy. There is not even one element of fiction. While the form in its totality is of course fictitious, these kinds of details are an actual documentation. Why we have done this, I don't exactly know. It is just that I felt one need not necessarily fictionalise and dramatise such social events.

While Kunjiraman was an extremist and his father a Gandhian, they had respect and love for each other. There was no enmity and disrespect as you see today. This respect and love for each other I have maintained in the film as well. The scriptwriter had a close association with the people and the actual events.

We spoke earlier of your experience and perceptions as a cartoonist. How has this experience specifically been reflected in UTHARAYANAM?
Some influences are there in the characterisations. The main characters in UTTARAYANAM are an unemployed youngster (Ravi) and an idealist, the 'Master'. 'Cheriya Manushyarun Valiya Lokaum' also carried two such characters (Ramu and Guruji). While I think there is some relationship between the two, it is not deliberate. I simply could not get out of the influence of years of cartooning. However these characters were an integral part of the original script- in which there was this explosive dramatic situation, where the son was about to kill the father. Thikkodyian (the script writer) being a playwright himself let the theatre elements prevail in the script. I removed these elements, and made the film more visual.

The film proceeds on the plane of realistic narration till the very end when it moves into the world of mysticism.
I have tried to give a logical progression towards this end, which is not a sudden development. Earlier Ravi meets a European Sanyasi. Think of the scene of him leaving home - his mother is crying, he has set off without even saying good bye to her; this is not just a trip - it is the 'movement'. This kind of leaving home and getting involved in movements are a common occurrence in our culture. There are many scenes before that, in the film where Ravi says farewell. Hence there was already a suggestion of what was to come.

Is the title UTTARAYANAM connected to the sun?
Yes, according to belief, within the sun's cycle, the best movement of the sun is uttarayanam - which is the time the sun moves to the north. Symbolically this becomes Ravi's own uttarayanam i.e.-a journey or movement into the forest - where he finds his peace/reconciliation.

KANCHANA SEETA




Your second film, KANCHANA SEETA is based on the play of C N Sreekantan of the same title. The play's main features were its very eloquent, long and authoritative dialogues, whereas your film is almost silent. It is really interesting - the change from eloquent dialogue to an eloquent silence.
There are some specific reasons for deciding to have sparse dialogues in KANCHANA SEETHA. One, this episode taken from Ramayan is familiar to all. Two, Ramayana is not a supernatural reality for us, as it is ingrained in us. It is therefore not necessary to educate people about the film through lengthy dialogues. C N had made clear the prakrithi-purusha notion in Ramayana. I did not think that Seetha should come in the film in the form of a woman. That is why Seetha appeared in the film as prakrithi (Nature) and Prakrithi is a character in the film. When the emotions of Seeta like pain, sadness, joy, and equanimity are manifested through the moods of Prakrithi, dialogue becomes redundant. I felt I could make the film without dialogue. Rama committing suicide - (I still feel it was - self immolation) had haunted me very badly. With all these, my KANCHANA SEETA became very different. Words were required only for very essentials. The dialogues, which I used, were from C N's play. The doubt I had then was whether my Rama and Lakshmana (as they were ordinary people) could use such an eloquent Sanskritised language.

I did not think that Seeta should come in the film in the form of a woman. That is why Seetha appeared in the film as Prakrithi (Nature) and Prakrithi is a character in the film. When the emotions of Seeta like pain, sadness, joy, and equanimity are manifested through the moods of Prakrithi, dialogue becomes redundant.


Was Rama really committing suicide?
Yes... in all probability. That is what I think. However his death in Sarayu River is not like any other kind of death. It was a Mahaprasthanam - an event of supreme self-sacrifice and purification, leaving everything behind. Everyone dear to him had gone. He had parted from Lakshman... he was troubled by many guilt feelings - the murder of Sambuka, the unfairness meted out to Seetha... Towards the end of the film, this mood prevails - Rama walks into the Sarayu river with the sacrificial fire, bearing everything including his loneliness, calling out for Seetha ... and disappears into the depths of the waters, carrying the sacrificial fire with him into the river is not in Ramayana - it is an interpretation.

Somehow the part I liked most in the film is this end. A few unexpected things happened for the good while shooting this last scene, for instance the unexpected early morning mist on the banks of Godavari, which is really rare occurrence, made the whole scene absolutely ethereal.

In the process you have reaffirmed life's essential bondage with fire and water, a concept deeply embedded in our philosophy, our culture and lifestyle. A recurring theme in fact, in all your films, is this interaction, merger and unification of the basic elements of life the panchabhoota. Now let me ask you about the concept of Stree as prakrithi. The Hindu (Indian) perception of prakrithi is very subtle. From Bhrama purusha is born; from purusha evolves prakrithi. What you have done is weave into these limitless horizons, an all-encompassing vision of life in visual with a great deal of authenticity. The totality of your visuals takes us to a realm of meaning beyond the immediate. How have you been able to achieve this?
What a good writer achieves with the imaginative use of language, cinema has to achieve with visuals. It is here that one recognises the limitations of technology and equipment available. I made this film with very simple equipments like table fans to rustle the leaves. If I had better equipment, I could have done a better job. Yet I have been able to create these subtleties to some extent in my visuals. However, I do know that it had to be much more cohesive and intense, Rama, Luv and Kusha, are all an essential part of Nature. This has not emerged as well as I would have liked and there are times when they remain as suspended images.

Let me ask you another question regarding the characterisation of Rama and Lakshmana. The prevalent ideas today about the epic and other characters in Hindu mythology are largely formed by the calendar pictures of Raja Ravivarma. Your Rama and Lakshmana are different. Rama has a paunch. Lakshmana has got pockmarks on his face. Why did you do this? What have you achieved through such a treatment?
In my opinion Ravi Varma has distorted a lot that was Indian painting tradition - he does not even seem to possess the simple sensibilities of painting which even an illustrator has. He has not even done a good study of portraiture. His compositions are static and the colours employed are terrible. I do not consider him a painter. I did not like his works from the beginning. Another thing is that our sculptures are large in size and exude strength and vitality, which is absent in murals. The Rama of KANCHANA SEETA exudes the strength and vitality of our sculptures. He is not just a plain frontal image. The wandering tribals we encounter here and there with their medicines also share this quality. I enquired and found that these people are settled in villages near the Godavari River. Apart from this they also believe that they belong to the same race. That is why I cast two of them in my film.

Should we take such faith and belief literally?
It is not necessary to do so. However their faith, their physique and mannerisms attracted me. Whether right or wrong, their faith has a basic tribal purity. The name of each village chief is Ramdas. The tribal, who acted as Rama is also a village chief. Transcending the rightness or validity of such beliefs, what we have to acknowledge and understand is the energy and liveliness of such a faith.

Well, thereby you have shorn Rama and Lakshmana of their divine magnanimity.
I have deliberately not given a super human quality to Rama and lakshmana. Only when they interact with Nature do they rise to the levels of God and go beyond the ordinary. Otherwise they would have been the same as anybody else.

Diametrically opposed to this, you have given Valmiki a very beautiful form and made him say to Rama that "all human beings are equal".
The Valmiki of my film is not an ordinary tribal; he is a visionary and a poet. So I have given him an appropriate form and beauty - a form, which pervades the beauty and purity of the soul all around. Valmiki, the poet, stands upto Rama on matters of principles. The poets of all ages should be questioning the injustices of their times. By the way, the dubbing for Valmiki was done by John Abraham.

Can you explain how you brought the Shambuka story into the film?
The Shambuka episode is brought in at the very beginning of the film. Rama meets Shambuka because Vasishta has ordered him to do so. Meditation has been made taboo for the lower castes. Rama feels the weight of his guilt. Shambuka's wife falls at the feet of Rama pleading with him not to kill her husband. This is where Rama feels the presence of Seetha hinted at and represented through some visuals of Nature. Rama looks up. I have repeated the same music and recreated the varying moods of nature whenever Rama experiences the presence of Seetha. Hence, I have used the Shambuka episode to highlight Rama's troubled conscience and evoke within him and the film the memory and presence of Seetha.


THAMBU
(Tent)



When you planned the film THAMBU, what was uppermost in your mind: was it the problems and insecurities of the circus artists or the response of the villagers to the circus tent?
I planned THAMBU as a documentary feature. The film was shot in Thirunavaya on the banks of Bharathapuzha. I came to this village with ten to fifteen circus artistes who had already left their circus company. We did not have a script, and we shot the incidents as they happened. What we did on the first day was to call all the villagers and perform a circus act for them. There were a lot of people who had not seen a circus before. We shot their responses as they were watching. We did not ask them to do anything. After the initial hesitation, they forgot the lights and the shooting and completely got involved in the circus. It was all very original. At that time the village was also getting ready for the Ayappan Vilaku festival, which we used in the film. Finally the whole village got so involved in preparing for its festival, they lost their interest in the circus. The film ends there. In fact it is a location film.

We did not have a script, and we shot the incidents as they happened. What we did on the first day was to call all the villagers and perform a circus act for them. There were a lot of people who had not seen a circus before. We shot their responses as they were watching. We did not ask them to do anything. After the initial hesitation, they forgot the lights and the shooting and completely got involved in the circus. It was all very original.


Well, in THAMBU also, there is a discontented young man.
This character was there in the film - young man from an upper middle class family returned from abroad and settled in the native land. I am fascinated by these kind of people. You see similar people in UTTARAYANAM also. This 'return' has been with us for a very very long time. Earlier people 'returned' from Singapore, Burma, Ceylon etc. Now they 'return' from the Gulf. That is the only difference. When they 'come back' they will build a big bungalow and live isolated from the others around. Their relationships are confined to those of similar 'type' - they will of course have their "weekend gatherings". The question is why do they 'come back' if they are unable to or do not want to mix with the people around? My young man is someone who is discontented with this sort of isolation and wants to be in tune with the people and surroundings. He does not like to sit at home. He starts learning to read Malayalam and then ask the circus whether he can join them and ultimately goes away with them.

Just a small comment. Although apparently 'regional', your films, one could say are much broader - Indian. Your comments on contemporary issue reflect more a cynicism towards the present (as in your cartoons) than a nostalgic return to the past.

To get back to the film - the young man has never been to see a circus, has he?
No. When the circus goes back he just goes along with them.

When a circus is on the move, the artists are resting or asleep. They have nothing to expect or remember from the places they visit or stay in. This young man takes a decision to go with them. Why? Perhaps a recognition that he is no different from them! Or is this decision merely coincidental?
He could not get along with his family. To escape the home atmosphere he goes and finds a place under the Banyan tree and learns to read etc. I have included in the film the moment of his decision to join the circus.

At home he was surrounded by rock music while he himself loves classical music. There you see him asking the circus to take him along. The circus manager tells him to get into the van. At that moment he has not identified himself with the circus - he is merely escaping from his environment. No one has taken note of him in the circus company. The film ends with the sequence of him sleeping by the side of the circus clown.

For the circus, this journey is a stagnation. A period of rest, where as for the young man this trip is a progress and escape.
We cannot really say predict what he will become or do... He could become anything...even a circus clown... We are not making it clear. The emphasis is on his escape from the immediate environment.

As you are talking about the journey of the young man, it occurs to me that all your films have this aspect of a voyage to self-discovery or a 'movement' towards betterment of humanity. e.g. in KANCHANA SEETA, Rama carrying the sacrificial fire and going into the Sarayu River; in UTTARAYANAM, Ravi going into the forest; the arrivals and departures of the bogeyman in KUMMATTI according to the seasons; in CHIDAMBARAM Shankaran Kutty's search for peace in his troubled conscience etc. Your films seem to be myriad manifestations of the deep desire of human kind for answers, peace, meaning…?
(Remains silent)


KUMMATTY




You have directed KUMMATTY as a children's film. Can we really categorise it as such?
Yes I think we can. What I have come to know is that the children who saw the film liked it. This film was appreciated in Japan and also screened in Channel 4 of BBC. Due to a lack of proper distribution system, this film could not be shown properly in India.

Kummatty's is a dual persona. A real personality and an assumed one. If he is not this he will remain just as an idea. And if he remains as a concept he will not fit into the essence of the story. I wanted to show that apart from his supernatural image he is also real.


While you were shooting for this film, did you give any special attention to the structure and details keeping in mind that it is oriented towards children?
I have adopted a narrative style, which might interest the children and kept a positive ending. The story is like a folklore, which the children can easily identify with. The music and landscapes were chosen specially, keeping children in mind.

Can you tell us a little about KUMMATTY?
KUMMATTY arrives like the seasons. He represents spring. He comes in fact in spring when the rain is over and the plants are green and in bloom. KUMMATIY is part of that Nature.

Yes, in the film KUMMATTY seems to emerge from Nature...
KUMMATTY comes alive on to the screen from a vanishing point and disappears into a dissolve. In a sense therefore, he comes back from where he disappeared. The landscape in these scenes is also special.

Why is that?
Though the landscape is that of Kerala, in KUMMATTY it is not 'a typical' landscape. It has extensive vacant land with a few trees here and there; very few houses and little human habitation; people are very simple. I thought the lonely lanes and the solitude of the landscape will contribute to the film. We cannot say that a KUMMATTY is coming to a familiar place where there are a lot of people. For this story we needed a functional backdrop. What is unusual in our context is a commonplace occurrence in film. That is to say we constructed a reality out of the unreal. For example the boy Chintan transforms into a dog but he continues to live in his house. He is still treated as a son.

The dog Chintan loses his way as he wanders and bumps into a wealthy family.
Yes, and they send him off from there saying he has no pedigree. From there he returns home. In the beginning he is treated like a son. After sometime the family accepts it as a fact that he is 'transformed' into a dog. His friends see him on their way to school. At this moment he has communication only with the bird in the cage, which responds to the sounds he produces. This is also the time he becomes aware of 'bondage'. As soon as he recovers his human form he releases the bird from the cage. You should also remember that he used to hurt this bird earlier. In his own experience of bondage he understood the bondage of the 'Other'. This experience redefines his ideas and attitudes.

How did you design KUMMATTY?
I discussed the costume of KUMMATTY with the artist Namboodiri. I knew the actor Ravunni earlier.

There is a scene in the film, where KUMMATTY removes his costume beard for a shave?
KUMMATTY's is a dual persona. A real personality and an assumed one. If he is not this he will remain just as an idea. And if he remains as a concept he will not fit into the essence of the story. I wanted to show that apart from his supernatural image he is also real. Through the masks he is bringing, I have related him to the animal forms as well. I introduced the scene of 'shaving' to reveal these characteristics of KUMMATTY. His actual personality is located between myth and reality and yet there is no fantasy in it at all. People sometimes call him a thief. I have also introduced in the film, elements of magic and black art in the beginning before the arrival of KUMMATTY. The doctor in this film is also a magician. According to the doctor's diagnosis, the woman with the fits (to whom he is administering medicine) is possessed. It has to be treated with black art. In fact the children follow the doctor to the house of the sick woman. The idea is that children are growing up in an atmosphere where KUMMATTY will not be an unusual guest.

Is not the pace and rhythm of KUMMATTY slow?
A fast pace will not suit this story. It has to have an organic movement and rhythm of its own.

It is said in the handout of KUMMATTY that this is the story of rebirths?!
Well, there is not anything like that in the film. The suggestion in the handout was unnecessary. Some such comment has appeared in the handout of KANCHANA SEETA also...


ESTHEPPAN:




I rate ESTHEPPAN as the best film I have seen.
Many have told me similar things. Personally also, the theme I like most is that of ESTHEPPAN.

In the film there is one person giving two stories of the same event. At this rate we don't know what is real and what is mythical. The issue here is which of the stories about Estheppan is right. Perhaps all of them are right, perhaps all are wrong.

Is there any real character like ESTHEPPAN in Kerala?
Not that I know of. ESTHEPPAN grew out of the many stories I have heard from different religions. A lot of my imagination has also gone into it.

Why did you then give it a Christian backdrop?
The story is also linked to the beliefs and practices of the fishermen. There is not any particular reason that the film has a Christian backdrop. However the structure of the Church, the seashore and the fisher folks together has given the film a depth and meaning, which may not have been the case with some other backdrop....

Can you explain the duality of reality and myth in ESTHEPPAN's individuality?
Actually, he was a very ordinary man. You understand ESTHEPPAN only through the stories people relate about him. There are people who tell one story in many different ways. In the film there is one person giving two stories of the same event. At this rate we don't know what is real and what is mythical. The issue here is which of the stories about ESTHEPPAN is right. Perhaps all of them are right, perhaps all are wrong.

Each episode in ESTHEPPAN is a story told about him. How did you bring it together?
The film begins with the shot of Estheppan coming from the sea. This is a story being told by the fishermen making their nets beginning with "Oh what an unusual brightness there is. It is like the sun has risen from the sea itself..." When this story ends another one begins... "It doesn't matter, let us find what exactly happened at the Church" and so one story begins and merges into another. It is not the type of story with a beginning, progression and end. In our tradition this is called 'Shakha Chamkramanam'.

We started with simple statements about Estheppan, going on to simple stories and then progressing to more complex ones. By the time the story grows complex, one 'event' has more than one interpretation. In the story of a boatman there was a person called Estheppan... who now is the guardian and protector of the fisher folk, whereas, the Esthappan who saves the grandson of the contractor is someone who is living in our midst.

So Estheppan is someone who lives beyond time and space.
Yes, there is a timelessness about him... He is said to have been seen at Ernakulam and Iddukki at the same time. At one moment he disappears into the space. That is the time people make a search for him. Then the priest tells them, "where can he go, he will come back to us" The film ends with the dance drama of the fishermen when the camera makes a 360-degree turn and you see Estheppan sleeping on a nearby rock.

After becoming a well-loved person for the villagers through his acts of generosity, Esthapan disappears from the village.
Estheppan shares the pain of a prostitute who has been ostracised by her family and society. Telling her "I will share your burden and you share mine" he takes money from his bag (bundle) and gives it to her. Later he extends a similar gesture of help to all the people in the village. With that gesture of goodness, people who disliked him earlier begin to accept him. He finds no meaning in continuing to stay and therefore he disappears.

Can you explain about the last dance drama? What does it signify?
First of all it is an art form, which is practised by the Latin Christian fishermen in our region. Secondly it is a miracle play in which there is one scene where an angel arrives. Everyone who has been telling stories about Estheppan is watching this play. I thought somewhere this play might help in understanding the myth of Estheppan - because the viewers themselves create the myth. Somewhere the play helps to sum up the film.

Is it not the characters in your film themselves who transform Estheppan into a miracle figure? Is it not true to life for people to create stories, than allow the same story to control them, their lives and beliefs?
There are people who live their lives through the stories and myths they create for themselves. It may be their way of regaining energy and the hope to continue living.

Even if Estheppan is a concept created by society or a character in a film, he also seems to be somebody searching for something propelled by an internal force... for example when the Vicar of the Parish asks him whether he would like to lead a normal life, Estheppan's answer is 'no' and that he will be content with some incense. What then is Esthapan?
Estheppan is a righteous person. He has teased the contractor who drops stones in the sea; he has drunk a whole bottle of whisky in the landlord's house in one shot. Through these gestures he is trying to say something. In every story he is portrayed as very human - a person who loves people and is sympathetic to their pains - some people blame him. Some ignore him. Yet he is largely talked about as very compassionate.

The character Estheppan is also shown as an artist whose paintings centre around figures with agony writ large on their faces.
Yes he paints Christian motifs, the figures of Christ, angels etc. In fact the actor (Estheppan) Kakanadan himself is a painter, whose work has contributed to the essence of this film.

Can you tell us also about the dialogues of Estheppan. The whole film thematically, moves on the plain of Christian thinking and concepts. However, the conversations of Estheppan are lyrical, stylised in a rhythm, which reminds one of the 'folk form' of Kerala. Normally such Christian themes and 'folk' dialogues do not blend. How did you bring about this creative merger?
The dialogue was written by Kavalam Narayana Paniker in a folk rhythm and style. A lot of biblical images are used in it; that is why it blends with the personality of Estheppan. While the rhythm helps to underline the personality of Esthapan, the biblical words and images create and maintain a Christian atmosphere.

What about the music in it?
The music in this film is mainly the sound of the waves and the Gregorian chanting from the church. The Gregorian music is part of the Latin Christians prayer services.


POKKUVEYIL:




POKKUVEYIL is said to be your most slow paced film.
That is right. Some shots in POKKUVEYIL are too long. What happened is that I first recorded the music and then edited the scenes accordingly. But as I was editing, I had to encounter some unforeseen practical problems, mainly recording the length of the film roll. That is why some shots remained lengthier and I could not avoid it. I wanted POKKUVEYIL to be a visual expression and manifestation of music, its many moods and variations, with an end in the past. The story was that of a sensitive young man slowly breaking up mentally. I tried to cut the film according to the notes of the music and tried to give it a structure.

I wanted POKKUVEYIL to be a visual expression and manifestation of music, its many moods and variations, with an end in the past. The story was that of a sensitive young man slowly breaking up mentally. I tried to cut the film according to the notes of the music and tried to give it a structure.


While there is a clear plot related to a young poet's psychic pre-occupations, why did you think of relating this to music and working out a structure according to that?
The film progresses in the musical structure of 1,2,3,4. 1,2,3,4…First, you see the house, then the homely Nisha, the sportsman, Joseph, who is a revolutionary and then again the house, the girl…the repetition of shots in that order. As the girl takes leave, this structure changes. The pace becomes faster. I thought this might help to bring out the life and movements of the protagonist Balu better.

The film begins and ends in the hospital where Balu is finally seen lying down in a foetus like position.
Yes that is right. The film ends on positive note with the protagonist lying down like a child in the womb. This cyclic structure of the film has been carefully and deliberately evolved.

You establish the psyche of Balu in his encounter with four other individuals.
Balu's world evolved basically from his relationships with four individuals! His father who is an idealist and a politician, his girl friend, the sportsman and the revolutionary. All of them mean a lot to him. His relationship with the family breaks with the death of his father; His girlfriend leaves him; the accident of the sportsman shakes him up deeply; and finally the revolutionary also says good-bye to him. His world crumbles and he becomes a mental wreck.

Balu wanted to go with Joseph as a political activist.
Balu does express his desire to get involved. However it is Joseph who has doubts about his ability to withstand the pressure of political involvement. Joseph promises to let him know as to when he can join him. Though Balu does not go along he feels just as intensely... It is just that he is not an extrovert, who could not jump in.

What was the kind of relationship he had with the girl?
It was a common interest in music that brought them together and not an intense emotional relationship based on love. The girl goes away to Bangalore with her father. She being the last link in his small world, he reacts to her departure very strongly and pleads with her not to go. For the first time he holds her hands and literally begs her... do not go... Later he pulls out the tape from the cassette she had presented to him. In fact from here the structure of the film changes completely. The continuity in music ends there and is used again only towards the end of the film. But here again it is a different tune - i.e. the early morning raga - Bhairavi. The music used earlier was a jugalbhandhi - the flute of Hariprasad Chourasia and the sarod of Dr. Rajiv Taranath.

There are some dream sequences of Balu in the film like the burning backwaters etc., which lend the film a more surrealistic air than symbolist one.
I do not use symbols in any of my films. I feel that symbols are not a good technique, either for cinema or for any other art form. The dreams Balu sees can be seen by anyone in Balu's state of mind. I worked out the progression of dreams only after consulting with a psychiatrist (Dr. Ramesh). A few are dreams I have seen myself, and the rest are that of my friends. I attempted to relate these to the subconscious process of the protagonist.

You shot the whole film in the twilight?
The whole event is imagined to be taking place at dusk against the setting sun. The lighting pattern is that which does not cast a shadow. It is the twilight mood.

What do you think about this film now?
I want to see this film once again. There seems to be a sustained interest in this film abroad and off and on I do get both critical and appreciative letters from people abroad. I have also received paintings in response!



CHIDAMBARAM:




The two films CHIDAMBARAM and ORIDATHU are commercial successes too. Is it due to the changing tastes of the audience or is it because your own films have changed?
Compared to my other films the above two had a sustained story line, especially CHIDAMBARAM. Then there were well-known cine artistes appearing in these films. These may be some of the reasons for their popularity.

Compared to my other films the above two had a sustained story line, especially CHIDAMBARAM. Then there were well-known cine artistes appearing in these films. These may be some of the reasons for their popularity.


You are one of those who firmly believe that cinema is a director's medium and hence have denied the role of popular actors. Also you are one of those directors who is articulate about the aesthetics of 'New Cinema' as opposed to commercial cinema. In CHIDAMBARAM for the first time you have introduced popular actors and actresses as also a linear narrative structure. What could be the reasons for this change?
I liked this story written by C V Sriraman. There were a few specific reasons for making it into a film at that point of time. After spending three years without a producer, I decided to produce this film on my own, which meant that I had to cut down expenses to the minimum. CHIDAMBARAM has only three characters. The village, Mattapatty provided a good backdrop for the film. There were also many friends to help me. Smita Patil had expressed her desire to act in one of my films much before this. Gopi was also willing to come. When they learned that it is my own production, many artists came forward to help. No one acted in the film expecting any financial returns from me. They did it for me. The story is intense and provided roles for good performances. All these are the reasons for CHIDAMBARAM.

Well, when you employ busy actors, would there not be a problem of their familiar mannerisms, style of acting, expectations of the audience etc.?
Yes, but it is different for actors like Gopi or actresses like Smita Patil. The expectations are different. They don't fall into the category of 'popular' as it is understood in the context of popular cinema.

When the film started it seemed refreshingly different. However after a while one began to notice the intrusion aspects of commercial cinema - for instance building up a climax and then breaking it - the audience is almost led to participate that something is going to happen between Shivakami and the superintendent. But we see suddenly that the relationship is actually between Shankaran and Shivakami.
(Silent for a moment). The film can be divided into two parts. One is the wedding of Muniyanti and Shivakami, the intimacy between Shivakami and Shankaran, the suicide of Muniyanti and the disappearance of Shankaran. The second part is Shankaran's response to the events. Shankaran is a very ordinary man - almost a simpleton. But he is very compassionate towards the lower castes - and mixes well with them. Shankaran's affinity to Shivakami at best is an infatuation. May be that is why he was unprepared and unable to face up to the eventualities. As he runs away he has some unusual experiences like getting frightened by the milk boy, the psychiatrist advising to him to read the Bhagavad Geetha, the liquor shop owner advising the people not to drink etc. There are some flaws in this film.

What are the differences between the original story and your film?
The main change is in the location, which shifted from Eerchamill location to the cattle farm location. Then, the protagonist of the story attempts to murder his senior officer after becoming aware of his relationship with his wife. In the film, Muniyanti kills his wife and commits suicide.

Didn't these changes invite criticism?
Yes, but the changes were introduced to make the story more visual and cinematic. It was not meant to be a socio-political film.

CHIDAMBARAM has received good critical acclaim in India. Many have written positively about the film, like Iqbal Masud, Ravindran etc. What is your assessment of this film?
CHIDAMBARAM is not really one of my best films. It makes me wonder why many people like it! I don't think the film is that great…


ORIDATHU:




The theme of this film is the electrification of a village and the changes this introduces in the village. Is it in any way a statement on modernity or mechanisation?
What the film underlines is the necessity for basic ethical premises, whatever one is engaged in. The film strictly is not on the effects of modernity or modern technology. This is just incidental - the theme could be anything. In this instance the overseer is a man without any scruples - and that is the central point.

What the film underlines is the necessity for basic ethical premises, whatever one is engaged in. The film strictly is not on the effects of modernity or modern technology. This is just incidental - the theme could be anything.


The film seems to be more allegorical. Many people work towards the electrification of the village apart from the overseers. So how is it that the ethical issue becomes only that of the overseer?
Everything in the village happens according to the scheming of the overseer who manipulates for his personal interests.

This film is very humorous compared to your other films.
There is an element of caricature in all the characters. A little exaggeration and lot of humour was consciously introduced to make effective the last sequence, which is the explosion. In fact the whole film moves towards the climax - the clash on the day of the festival and the breaking out of the fire.

The film begins and ends with a festival.
The film begins with a festival in the temple (this happens before work begins for the electrification) The festival does not come up to the expectation of the villagers. According to the belief in the village, if the temple festival does not do well, the Poorum festival will be a great success. The film ends with the celebration of Poorum.

This is a film where you have used the maximum number of shots.
ORIDATHU is complex in that it has many characters and many incidents and therefore does not have a single motif - the usual type of music is also absent. I worked with a cinematic form, which could engage the audience, for which I had to use more shots taken from different angles. This is also a film where I have used the sounds of the incidents to the maximum.

Why did you use a Trivandrum accent for the overseer, Sundaresan (Nedumudi Venu)? Was there not sufficient comedy in the film without this element?
I have used different dialects used in Malayalam, for example the villagers speak pure Valluvanadan Malayalam of South Malabar, the fake Doctor uses Travancore Malayalam etc.

The setting of this story is between 1952-55. Is not the portrayal of the communist in the film a little out of place and also a little unbelievable?
A bit of caricaturing is done of this character also. Yet someone like him lived in my village too. Some one who believed that everything that happened and is happening in Russia is great-like the bridges they build, their hydro-electrical projects etc - and worthy of being emulated. Many have reacted violently to this portrayal. It is really sad that when the Russians themselves are re-evaluating their politics and practices we react badly even to a joke! I have sought to portray this character positively as someone who is concerned about society.

How was this film received outside Kerala and abroad?
On the whole the response was good. The film has gone for the maximum number of film festivals and everywhere has received a positive response.

We can relate this film to the electricity problem we are facing in the country. A nuclear power plant is going to be established in Koodamkulam near Nagar Koil. Some say it is good and some consider it is bad. What do you think of it?
My opinion is that nuclear power is dangerous. However it is not only nuclear power plants, but the entire trend in science and technology which is negative. The question is how do you perceive development. What is 'development'? The problem is of how you handle the process of development. Though concepts like "small is beautiful" etc. have existed, people are more conscious about it these days. Countries like Japan are also trying to contain 'progress' and people are giving more time to leisure. The business establishments spend a lot of money for creative works like theatre, paintings etc.

ORIDATHU is discussing a serious issue, but I have a feeling the treatment of it is very simplistic....
I will not debate that.

Recently a lot of offbeat films were received well in Kerala - ORIDATHU, ANANTHARAM of Adoor Gopalakrishnan etc. What do you think of it?
This is a very local trend, which perhaps is also there in Bengal, where a number of filmmakers and film societies make films and have discussions on new cinema.


MARATTAM:




Do tell us about your film MARATTAM which is under production.
This film is also based on the story written by Kavalam Narayana Paniker. The story is of the love (which is more an erotic attachment) which a woman feels towards the Kathakali character in Keechaka Vadham(the killing of Keechaka). The story of the film is different from the original. In the film after Keechaka is killed, a policeman comes to enquire about it. You can say that the film narrative is centred around the earnest enquiry of this policeman into the murder. The film can be divided into three parts. Each part is a version about the murder of Keechaka.

The first version of it is told by Koipattiri who plays the role of Valalen in Kathakali. In the play he does kill Keechaka who was a bad man. But he has not killed Kelu, who acted as Keechaka; He cannot even conceive of doing so since Kelu is his friend and a good man. The first part acts out how Koipattiri kills Keechaka.

In the film after Keechaka is killed, a policeman comes to enquire about it. You can say that the film narrative is centred around the earnest enquiry of this policeman into the murder. The film can be divided into three parts. Each part is a version about the murder of Keechaka. All the three episodes are rendered differently. The first song is rendered in the folk tune and rhythm of Thampuran Pattu of Southern Kerala. The second version is set to the tune of Pulluvan Pattu, and the third in the style of Ayappan Pattu.


So what is the relationship of Koipattiri to Keechaka's murder?
We have not made that clear. It is kept as a mystery. The second part is the story told by the wife of Koipattiri. She tells the police that she has committed the murder. But she has killed Kelu. She cannot think of killing Keechaka who for her symbolises the ultimate male whereas Kelu is an ugly and indecent person. She kills him when he makes advances to her. This is acted out in the second part.

The third part of the story is told by the Chorus. They killed the artist in Kelu because Kochashan (tutor) from the 'Kalari' (school) tells them to do so. All the three episodes are rendered differently. The first song is rendered in the folk tune and rhythm of Thampuran Pattu of Southern Kerala. The second version is set to the tune of Pulluvan Pattu, and the third in the style of Ayappan Pattu. All the songs are written by Kavalam Narayana Paniker.

In this film Kelu appears as 'Kelu' as well as in the role of Keechaka. Both roles are rendered in a similar fashion. Why is that?
There is not anything realistic in the film. There are no dialogues either. There is only narrative poetry.

How have you concluded this film?
As the policeman goes back you hear the drums of Kathakali. A wayfarer tells the police that "today there is Kathakali at the 'Kolathu' (the temple theatre). The story is Keechakavadham and Kelu is playing the role of Keechaka".

So is the film a fantasy play?
It could be seen as such but we have not treated the visuals like that.

The film sounds like Kurosava's RASHAMON which also portrays multiple versions of a death.
This film has an overt resemblance to RASHAMON but beyond that there is nothing common. The form, the structural pattern, the narrative and the stylisation etc. are very different.

How have you edited this film?
I have kept a continuous movement while fusing the three episodes. Most of the shots used in the film are either crane shots or trolley shots. There is no still shot other than that of the policeman who is in a way, external to the story. He asks the same questions as any policeman normally asks for his First Information Report.

You have shot MARATTAM for National TV. Has there been any restrictions imposed on you because of that?
There is nothing like that...

This film is based on Kathakali. So why did you use folk forms in music instead of original Kathakali tunes?
Kathakali has its own rigidity. It is not possible to make a film confining oneself to its form.

You told that MARATTAM you employed colours consciously?
I have not selected the colours with any special emphasis or meaning. Yellow, maroon, white, red, black etc. are familiar colours used frequently in Kathakali, costumes, rituals, mural paintings and rangoli etc.

Who are all the actors in it?
The actors are from Kathakali and theatre. Sadanandan Krishnamurthy who acted as Keechaka is a Kathakali actor. Kalamandalam Kesavan is Koipattiri. Kavuti is the dance artiste Urmila and so on...

You have made this film for Television. Do you think it will be fully understood and appreciated by the people outside Kerala?
The film is subtitled in an easy style. There is also not much usage of Kathakali symbols, except in the beginning. I hope the film will be understood and appreciated.

Your documentary film SAHAJA has created some controversy recently. What has happened actually?
SAHAJA was the last bit of a programme designed by Chandralekha for exhibition in Russia. Her exhibition portrayed the Indian women, their activities and their cultural context. It is a half an hour documentary based on our Ardhanariswara concept. The attempt was to portray the inherent feminine principle in the masculine. For this we had included Odissi of Keluchandra Mahapatra and 'Bhamakalapam' performed by Vedantam Satyanarayana Sastri. How far the documentary was successful in bringing the Ardhanariswara concept out, I do not know. However, it could have gone as part of the exhibition. SAHAJA is part of the New Delhi film festival - Indian Panorama.

Other than Tarkovsky's SACRIFICE, there have not been any films which can be termed 'outstanding' for quite a few years now. I like all the films of Tarkovsky. I also like many films of various directors. But if you want to call someone a Master Director, it is Tarkovsky.


But why did this film become so controversial?
I don't know... It was part of the project accepted by the Human Resource Ministry. The project had also mentioned that this film was based on the Ardhanariswara principle. Why was it excluded at the last moment... Perhaps they wanted to show a film on Indira Gandhi?! I do not see any particular reason for it… In Chandralekha's project, Indira Gandhi was portrayed as one of the outstanding women of India along with Sarojini Naidu and Balasaraswathi. In place of SAHAJA they screened a film on Indira Gandhi (laughs) looks like that is what they wanted.

What is your opinion of film censorship?
I think films should not be censored. It is really bad to cut a piece out of a serious work of art. Such things will affect the whole structure. However since we cannot afford it now, it is wise to perhaps work accordingly, I do take some precautions and have not faced any censor problems.

You don't agree with the censoring of vulgar elements in commercial cinema?
Is there not a lot of vulgarity inspite of it? Those who have a lot of money and influence do break rules. In reality, censorship will affect only the serious filmmakers and not those who indulge in vulgarity. Censorship will not give the filmmaker enough room for creative experiments endeavours.

What do you think of the governmental subsidies and financial assistance to filmmakers? What do you think of the role played by institutions like NFDC?
First it was only the Bengal State Government, which produced films. This was given up since it was a failure. NFDC is doing as much as it can in this regard.

One hears a lot of complaints about the India International Film Festivals!
Other than in socialist countries, only in India the Government is conducting film festivals. Elsewhere it is either by individuals or institutions. I think the festival suffers the limitations of every other governmental enterprise. The government has to take care of its diplomatic relations and other interests, then there is the bureaucracy... the problems of finance etc.... The Directorate of Film Festivals is only a small department under the Information and Broadcasting Ministry...

Are we conducting the festivals with an emphasis on aesthetic sensibility?
No. The angle is that of 'Developmental Activity'. The finance department considers the money spent on it as a loss. It should not be viewed like that. The government has to spend money on many things without measuring the returns in terms of financial profitability. The film festivals went back to the government because NFDC could not bear the losses. When NFDC was conducting the festivals it was a little more open and flexible, I suppose...

Recently I had gone through the entire list of films in the Indian Panorama, one could notice some interesting developments. When the Panorama began only the 'new wave' or 'parallel' cinema was represented. From 1980 onwards we see the inclusion of commercial films as well. Now this year, in Malayalam, only commercial films are included in the Panorama. In the beginning it looked like Panorama was only for the 'off beat' films. Now is it the turn of commercial cinema?
Well... it is something like that now. It could be because a premier show on Doordarshan will fetch rupees eight lakhs. People will try to influence decisions. The main problem is that of the selection committee, which represents varied interests. The cancellation of the provision of a review of rejected films at the regional level has made things worse, since the regional panel has now become the sole authority to decide which film will get into the Panorama. Perhaps this year's selection is a good example of what can really happen... to mention one or two films which should have been in the Panorama are Satyan's SAMVATSARANGAL and Ravindran's ORE THUVAL PAKSHIKAL. Why are they not included in the Panorama?! Opportunities for exposure is lost for these films and filmmakers. We don't have to hunt for reasons for the dwindling credibility of the Indian panorama as well as for the empty auditoriums while Panorama films are exhibited these days.

You have been attending festivals abroad. What is the state of the world cinema and what are its standards?
Other than Tarkovsky's SACRIFICE, there have not been any films which can be termed 'outstanding' for quite a few years now. I have not seen LAST TEMPTATION by Scorcese. Everyone who has seen the film has told me that it is a superb work. Our government has decided not to show that film here.

Whose works do you like the most?
I like all the films of Tarkovsky. I also like many films of various directors. But if you want to call someone a Master Director, it is Tarkovsky.

What about the Indian Directors?
I like Mani Kaul's films.

John Abraham?
AGRAHARATHIL KAZHUTHAI is a good film. In the other films we can perceive the genius in John. But the productions are erratic. They don't have the discipline and organisation a film requires. This could be because of the special nature of his lifestyle.

Based on the Ramayana, you directed KANCHANA SEETHA. What do you think of the Ramayana of Ramanand Sagar as also the Mahabharata now being serialised?
I have seen only few episodes; my opinion is limited to that. I am afraid, it might badly affect the imagination of our children and their sensibilities as also our own!

We have not discussed your documentaries. Can you tell about the documentaries you consider important?
I have done a lot of documentaries by now. But there are only three or four worth mentioning. One is on V T Bhatathiripad, the other biography of J Krishnamurthy, "Seer Who Walks Alone'; and 'Sahaja'. There are also one or two incomplete documentaries - an hour-long film on the folk dances of Kerala, and a film on E M S Namboodiripad. At the moment I am planning a one and half hour film on V K Krishna Menon.

I have read that you were very deeply moved by the scene in the film where Shri Krishnamurthy is shown crossing the bridge over Ganga?
I had not met Shri Krishnamurthy earlier. Although I had read his works and about him, I had not understood them completely. Meeting him has made a difference, although we have not talked at length or even discussed his philosophy. He is a very honest man. According to him, our lives in the modern context cannot be explained in terms of any particular philosophy like Buddhism or any other. It is beyond them.

The scene you are talking about is the last shot in the film. Krishnamurthy was walking across one of the tributaries of Ganga, the 'Pancha Ghosh' Marg to Saranath. Shaji and I were waiting to shoot this without his knowledge. During summer although one can walk across the river, there always is a boatman waiting on the banks. What I saw is that as soon as Krishnamurthy saw the boatman he put his hand around his shoulder like good old friends, started talking and laughing with him. What touched me deeply was this simplicity. The last scene is not acted out for the film. I don't think he knew we were shooting.

Do you have any film, which is half done or abandoned in your career?
No. I do have some preliminary ideas for one or two films - one is about the migration from Travancore to Malabar. It would involve about four generations, moving from the love of the soil and land to the attractions of the city.

What is your approach to your own personal life?
My personal life is a free flowing one. Not very disciplined.

Do you think your films receive adequate exposure and are well appreciated?
I don't know - I don't think so. There are problems regarding distribution and exhibition. I have not been successful in propagating my films or explaining them.

I have heard that you are a person of few words. When I told my friends about this interview, they were surprised and are waiting in anticipation. Normally I don't mingle with many people. I talk only little, even with the close friends I have. Also I don't encourage interviews since it is difficult to explain and answer all the questions. Again what comes out in print may not be the same as that which was discussed. Then one has to clarify etc. Well, I think that this is the first time I am talking at this length and depth about my films!

[Translated from Malayalam by George Kutty A L]