Theodore Baskaran on Film and Literature at MLS

Theodore Baskaran தியோடோர் பாஸ்கரன், renowned film critic, and author of a history of Tamil cinema, Em Tamizhar Seytha Padam (The Films Made by our Tamils) எம் தமிழர் செய்த படம் lectured on the topic “From Print to Screen : Literature and Tamil Cinema” at the Madras Literary Society, on 21 April, 2018.

The lecture was preceded by the opening of a Tamil Books section, at the MLS, thanks to a generous contribution of Rs.25000/- from Smt Padmapriya and her husband Sri Baskaran (no relation to the speaker). via their foundation Aalayam Kanden Trust. They donated the full receipts of Padmapriya’s book “The Gods of the Holy Koovam”, which was released in Feb 2017 at the MLS. On that occasion, I had the privilege of lecturing on the History of the MLS, based on the then recently rediscovered book by N Ramaswami. Several books have also been donated by various people and patrons. The library is eager to expand both its collection and its membership.

Padmapriya and Baskaran and friends
Tamil Books Section MLS

Nivedita Louis, who compered the program, invited me to say a few words about the Tamil section. I said that it was an extraordinary and generous contribution by Padmapriya. I added that such a section was long overdue, given the historical association of the MLS with the Tamil language, its discovery of the Dravidian and Munda families of languages by Francis Whyte Ellis and his collaborators, and the significance of their contributions to several aspects of Tamil society in general.

Theodore Baskaran lecture at MLS

These are my notes from Theodore Baskaran’s lecture.

He had prepared a PowerPoint presentation in Tamil, but he said that, based on a quick glance at the audience, he felt it best that he speak in English.

Tamil film had a long association with books and notable authors. The film Malai Kallan மலை கள்ளன், starring MGR, was written by Namakkal Kavingar, a famous Tamil poet. Classical Tamil literature like Silappadikaaram சிலப்பதிகாரம் and Kundalakesi குண்டலகேசி had inspired such films as Kannagi கண்ணகி and Manthiri Kumari மந்திரிக்குமாரி, adapted as screenplays by M Karunanidhi. Both MGR எம்.ஜி.ஆர் and Karunanidhi கருணாநிதி later became Chief Minsters of Tamilnadu as did their mentor, CN Annadurai அண்ணாதுரை, a popular playwright, novelist and screenwriter.

But these famous names came later. Anaathai Penn (Orphan Girl) அனாதை பெண், a book by Vai.Mu. Kothainayagi, வை.மு.கோதைநாயகி a path-breaking feminist, freedom fighter and author of the early twentieth century was filmed by Raja Sandow. It was the first Tamil book to be made into a movie. Serialized novels in magazines were popularized by SS Vasan, the founder and head of Gemini Studio. He published stories like the famous Thyaga Bhoomi தியாக பூமி, written by Kalki கல்கி and Thillana Mohanambal தில்லானா மோகனாம்பாள் by Kothamangalam Subbu கொத்தமங்கலம் சுப்பு. Such novels were the source for several of his movies.

Unfortunately, most Tamil films are merely photographed drama, the speaker lamented. Most film directors, even the popular ones, like AP Nagarajan and K Balachandar came from the stage. Cinema has its own grammar, different from print and the stage. Few filmmakers understood this. Also, Tamil country had a very popular era of stage plays before the advent of film, full of songs and dance, and narrations of mythological stories. When the era of silent movies ended, and talkies came along, the first generation of actors were all from the stage, far better at singing than acting. The tradition of songs in the film, often utterly unrelated to the story, is till date a major flaw of Tamil cinema, the speaker said. They only retard the narrative.

The era of mythologicals gave way to social themes during the 1950s, primarily fueled by the politics of the Dravidian movement. This merely replaced innumerable songs with interminable monologues. Even Dravidian film makers who brought on social themes like caste discrimination and social justice, had actors talking like they were on  political podium rather than exploiting the grammar film.

Not many of us know Rajaji ராஜாஜி was an excellent writer in Tamil, Mr Baskaran continued. His novel Thikkarra Parvathi திக்கற்ற பார்வதி was filmed by Singeetham Narasinga Rao. The major flaw in the story is that the protagonist gets addicted by drinking toddy. You can't get addicted to toddy, only arrack. I have drunk toddy, nothing happens, he quipped. Rajaji didn't know the difference because he was not a drinker.

Literary writers also contributed their mite to the screen. Ucchi Veyil (High Noon) உச்சி வெயில் a novel by Indira Parthasarathy இந்திரா பார்த்தசாரதி was turned into a film called மறுபக்கம் which won a National Best Film award, but was totally ignored by Tamil population, because it was not a commercial hit. Tamil audiences and even the film world had a mental division of films as either commercial or art, and the latter label was an omen of commercial failure.

In this dark world of Tamil cinema, there were  a few flashes of lightning like Jayakanthan ஜெயகாந்தன் who filmed two of his own novels. Yarukkaaka Azhuthaan (For whom did he cry) யாருக்காக அழுதான் one of Jayakanthan’s films is one of my favorite films, he said. Nimoy Ghosh, who settled in Madras, and was a contemporary of the legendary Bengali film maker Satyajit Ray, shot this film and used very imaginative lighting.

Great films like Mullum Malarum (The Thorn and the Flower) முள்ளும் மலரும் were made from mediocre novels. This is often true of Hollywood films like Godfather and Psycho. Anuradha Ramanan’s அனுராதா ரமணன் novel Chirai(Prison) சிறை was made into a film – a rare example of a female author’s book, after VaiMuKo.

Sila Nerangalil Sila Manithargal (Some People in Some Moments) சில நேரங்களில் சில மனிதர்கள் was another classic Jayakanthan novel, filmed by a director who showed people talking all the time - it wasn’t very visual. Most authors feel unhappy that directors have misunderstood their novel and made a mess of the movie, but often the authors themselves had a very poor sense of filmmaking. They also indulged in long dialogs and poor pacing.

Alfred Hitchcock said, “Never use words to describe what you can simply show.”A filmmaker should think visually first, but most Tamil filmmakers think verbally. This led to absurd scenes. For example, there are scenes where a character walks into a room and  says things like, “There is nobody here” or “Ah, there is a glass of water.” The audience can see this, why this superfluous dialogue?

A brilliant example of visual filmmaking is from the Hollywood film Gandhi. In a scene, Gandhi washes his face in the river, when he notices a desperately poor woman, washing half her saree. She is so poor she has only one saree and she can only wash one half of it while wearing the other. Not even looking at her, and not wantingto overtly walk over and give her a shawl, Gandhi lets slip his shawl into the river, and it gently floats to the lady. She gratefully grabs it. Without one word being spoken, the filmmaker Richard Attenborough shows the compassion of Gandhi...

Often a film can be inspired by a short story, not a novel. Such was Baskar Shakti’s short story, made into a wonderful film Azhagar Saamiyin Kuthirai (Azhagar Saami’s horse) அழகர் சாமியின் குதிரை.

The Malayalam film Madhilukkal (Walls) மதிலுக்கள் has a scene of the line where the protagonist in the novel, a prisoner, says, “I could smell women, on the other side of the wall”. Because a womens prison was on the other side. Adoor Gopalakrishnan the director, could not show the character smelling the walls. So he introduces a peal of a woman's laughter. This is creative interpretation, and evokes the same emotion the author intended.

Overall, Tamil unfortunately doesn't have a good relationship between literature and film. Several novelists' books have not been made into films.

Cinema is not for entertainment, he concluded.

Gopu’s Comments

While I whole heartedly agree with Theodore Baskaran in his criticism of Tamil cinema as being too verbal, photographed drama, and not often visual, I think he is totally off the mark on two issues.

1. Songs – Indian audiences love them. In fact cinema music is the most succesful and popular music industry and genre in India. The bulk of the audience simply doesn’t care that the narrative is broken or retarded, or irrelevant to the film. Often the songs are far more popular than the movies.

2. “Cinema is not for entertainment.” I think what Theodore Baskaran means, is that cinema is a powerful medium that can be used to educate and mould public opinion, improve society etc.  Personally I prefer entertaining cinema to any advice and propaganda.

3. Literature versus Cinema. I think good literature (itself a very subjective estimation, usually by a segment of the population that reads a lot of books, and has an innate sense of superiority) rarely makes for good cinema (another subjective estimation). In contrast, often so called mediocre novels, make for excellent and successful cinema, because they appeal to more than snobs and nabobs. John Grisham and Chetan Bhagat’s novels are the most popular proof. Often the “mediocrity” of one generation is the classic of its succeeding generations.

Related Links

Theodore Baskaran’s essay in Madras Musings How Old is Tamil Cinema

Pradeep Chakravarthy essay in Madras Musings on Gods of the Holy Koovam 

Sid Caesar's Ghost

Indian Literature – Four hundred Shakespeares, zero Jules Vernes

Vai Mu.Kothainayagi – A Biographical Lecture by Dr Va Ve Subramaniam

Rajaji –A Biographical Lecture by Dr Va Ve Subramaniam

Francis Whyte Ellis - by Thomas Trautmann

தமிழ் இலக்கியம் – ஒரு கால அட்டவணை

Books

எம் தமிழர் செய்த படம் (The Films Made by our Tamils)  by Theodore Baskaran

Mu. Ka –A biography of M Karunanidhi  by Ramki. J

Gods of the Holy Koovam by Padmapriya Baskaran

The Art and Aesthetic of Driving

I saw the movie Rush on TV last weekend, while Narendra Modi was orating in Madison Square Garden in New York. The movie is about the Formula One racing – particularly the contest between two drivers, Niki Lauda of Austria and James Hunt of England. Racing is the only thing they have in common – their characters are diametrically opposite.

James Hunt is a womanizer, aggressive, muscular, handsome, utterly contemptuous, a bag of testosterone that artists decry in life and celebrate in art.

In one scene, Lauda is given a lift by a woman, Marlene. He hasn’t told her that Ferrari just signed him up. He makes remarks about various aspects of the car. When the car breaks down, she tries to use her sex appeal to get a lift. A passing car stops – not for her, but recognizing Niki Lauda – and they ask him to drive their beat up old car. This is how Marlene discovers who he is. “You cant be a Formula One driver,” she says. “They have long hair, they are sexy, shirts open upto here...” she pauses. “Besides, you are driving like a old man.” Lauda merely smiles!

“Why don’t you drive fast?” she asks.

“There is no need to drive fast,” he retorts. “It increases the percentage of risk. Right now, there’s no reward, no incentive.”

Lauda’s reply is astounding, for any driver. Formula One driver, it is totally unbelievable.

In the brilliant cinematic moment, that every race fan waits for, Marlene challenges him, when he calmly asks, “Why should I drive fast?”

“Because I am asking you to.”

It’s brief, all cuts and flashes and sound effects, but for the next few seconds of film, there’s shifting of gears, the roar of the engine and the uncontrolled excitement of the guys who gave Niki Lauda a lift as he careens their ordinary car through the Italian country side. And Marlene for the first time, discovers acceleration. We have seen far better scenes of car racing, and some terrific driving and road stunts, in movies like Ronin or Iron Man, with far larger budgets. Considering how much time is devoted in movies to races and chases – in bikes, cars, planes, trains, boats etc., the general opinion is that driving fast is the ultimate skill on the road. It is exactly this aspect, and that of living fast, that the movie’s other character, James Hunt displays.

In this context, it is utterly amazing, that the philosophy of driving as espoused by Lauda, actually made it to a film on car racing! I have only known about Lauda’s name – and all I have seen of car racing is mostly Formula 1 or CART on TV. Other races like Nascar, Le Mans etc don’t interest me, and bike racing rarely does either.

Alistair MacLean’s The Way to Dusty Death is a terrific book about the racing world, is a terrific read. But it is a crime story and about racing, not driving. Reader, if there are any books you know about driving – please let me know.

Lauda’s philosophy is about driving. Anyone who takes pleasure in driving a car, derives pleasure in how it responds, how it growls, how it takes curves, the feel of accelerational gravity, how the car eats tarmac, how it glides smoothly sideways, the pleasure of overtaking a whole bunch of cars, the recognition of other drivers or the mild envy or admiration when they see you do something special on the road – such a person knows the pleasure of driving, not just the pleasures of the scenery on the road. Few of us ever drive a racing car or on a race course. For those few of us lucky enough to have driven a sports car, with an engine that can growl and squeal and slice through the wind and delight and exhilarate and put a grin on your face, philosophy is something that you place in the back seat, assuming your car has a back seat.

But : it isn’t really – when you come up very quickly on the tails of a much less powerful car, and its driver pulls over in fear or irritation, you know you have done the wrong thing, the road is not a race course. That philosophy, Do no harm, is part of the basic principle of driving. 

For most of us driving is a skill. For professionals like cab or truck or bus drivers, it is a craft. I wonder whether professional drivers have developed a sense of art about driving.

But truly, truly, truly, for those who enjoy driving, it is an art, and it has an aesthetic. The aesthetics of the art of driving varies from person to person, car to car, place to place, perhaps even with age and company and music and mindset.

Connoisseur of the commonplace சாதா விந்தைகளின் ஆரா ரசிகன்