Friday, February 24, 2012
What is reality? A study
Sajit M.Mathews
What is Reality pertaining
Photographs and Paintings?
Reality is a ‘concept’ which
can be defined at various levels. A lay man’s definition of reality would be
“that which is experienced with senses, as perceived in full consciousness.”
A level deeper, a philosopher
could give us an ontological definition of reality. A flower I see can be real
as much as a thought I have about that flower. Reality is subjective and
objective. Objectively, a flower (in itself) is a reality, irrespective of the
names given to it or the qualities attributed to it. Subjectively, a flower can
be what I perceive the flower as. The same flower can be perceived and
understood as a biological wonder and an aesthetic entity by two/the same
observer.
At a level further, we can
reflect upon the essence and esse of reality. There is a ‘flowerness’ in the
flower which makes it the flower. Change in variety, colour, age, aroma, etc.
are qualities added to the basic esse of the flower. We could say that is what
a flower is.
Though we are aware of these
philosophical facts about reality, we also know that a pragmatic way of looking
at life and reality does not need deep thinking like this. Therefore, reality
is what is perceived, for most of us.
Thoughts are representations
of reality. But what is acutely real for me in thought may not be so real for
another person. Thoughts of a person could be interpreted in various ways, as
we discussed earlier. Just like thought, visuals (Photographs, Paintings, etc.)
are also representations of reality. Only the mode does change. These
representations too could be interpreted and understood at various levels.
Photographs
A photograph captures the
colours, light and shade of an object/scenery/animal with much technical
accuracy. This accuracy can also be manipulated using special lenses, filters
and computerized editing. The product of these processes of capturing, editing
and reproducing portrays a slice of reality against a context which is almost
always alien to the onlooker.
A photograph is as real as the
original scene if only the context is already known to the observer. If it is
known, a photograph could evoke the same emotions or responses as the original
could have done. But the photograph - an extract from the reality - naturally
loses continuity in both time and space.
Painting
Now let us consider a
painting. A painting is an interpretation of what an artist sees in the world
or in her/his mind, using imagination. It could be a real scene, or an
imaginary scene or a mixture of both. The advantage of a painting is that the
artist could mix colours and tell tales of life which (in a way) is impossible
with photography. A painting may not always be understood by untrained eyes.
There are codes of colours and light and shade embedded in it. Yet a painting
is real as much as a photograph is. A painting can evoke the same responses as
the original scene, if the background of the painting is known.
Paintings generally carry
themes picked by artists and those themes are evidently manifest in them. A
painter could bring in two opposing or contradicting ideas or objects into the
same scene, which may be impossible for a photograph. Moreover, as a medium
used by human beings from time immemorial, paintings have livelier relationship
to us, humans.
When it comes to choosing
which is nearer to reality- photograph or painting, I am confused. The reason
is, to me, these both appear to be of the same level of reality. A photograph
is better than a painting in terms of clarity, complete representation and
technical perfection. A painting is better than a photograph in terms of
imagination and creativity. Both photographs and paintings in their own way are
close to reality. Both in one way or another are away from reality too.
Conclusion
Yet,
when a choice is necessary, a photograph could be much more realistic than a
painting. Certain aspects of what is seen cannot be taken out of sight in case
of photography. Whether photographer wishes or not, these inseparable aspects
of visuals stick to the image. Quality reproduction keeps them intact and makes
them all the more clear. The shape, size, contrast, etc. are some of such
qualities. In that respect, the viewer cannot be completely alienated from a
photograph’s reality. Whereas, this alienation is possible in case of a painting.
Therefore,
my vote goes to photograph as it has a higher degree of reality represented in
it, than a painting.
hhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh
A response to Ravi Vasudevan's article: The Exhilaration of Dread: Genre, narrative form and film style in contemporary urban action films
Introduction
Film is a
powerful medium. Nobody has a debate on that. Films have grown in the last
century from being a fantasy and a hobby affair to be one of the largest
industries of the world. What was taken for granted in the beginning is today,
a field of specialization and research. And this huge cultural product and
entertainment industry has to go through so many processes, since a huge sum of
money is involved. That apart, the quality of films needs to be scrutinized on
a regular basis. This check should be in qualitative terms, whether our films
are up to the set standards.
But a
qualitative check is not all. There are a million ways in which films influence
human lives. Millions of people who throng to cinema halls everyday enter the
halls with different purposes. Cinema is not just a medium of entertainment.
Cinema has powerful influence on what people think, decide and do. Such
consequences make films all the more important. Film can fall into the hands of
propagandists and malicious people, who can use to subvert human minds for
their purposes. For this reason, there need to be constant analysis of what
goes on in cine field.
Off late,
we are doing well in looking at the cinema, audience, its present, past and
future. We should continue to look so. Ravi Vasudevan’s articles are a ‘looking
at’ of academia, at the cinema of our country. They use the methodology of
social sciences to analyze films and related issues.
In this
paper, I have summarized three of his articles and added my responses to them
in the form of reflections and comments.
About Ravi Vasudevan
Ravi Vasudevan is a Senior Fellow
at the Centre for the Study of Developing Societies (CSDS). He completed his research
on the history of Indian nationalism at Jawaharlal Nehru University and
subsequently on Indian film melodrama at the University of East Anglia. His
present research concerns are the history and theory of film and media
experience. He is part of the Sarai programme of CSDS, which he co-directs with
Ravi Sundaram. He runs the film and contemporary media transformations
component in the Sarai project Publics
and Practices in the History of the Present: Old and New Media in Contemporary
India. Vasudevan teaches on film and is guest faculty with the
Department of Film Studies, Jadavpur University, and the Mass Communication
Research Centre, Jamia Millia Islamia. In 2004 he coordinated a lecture and
film series for the School of Arts and Aesthetics, Jawaharlal Nehru University.*
Vasudevan is a member of the
editorial collective of the Sarai Reader series and the advisory board of the
film studies journal Screen. He has edited Making Meaning in Indian Cinema
(Delhi: Oxford University Press, 2000). Vasudevan also undertakes film
curations regularly for Sarai. In 2003, he curated the film series ‘Selves Made
Strange: Violent and Performative Bodies in the Cities of Indian Cinema’ for
the exhibition body.city on contemporary Indian arts at the
House of World Cultures, Berlin.*
Vasudevan bases most of his studies on the Bombay film industry, the premier
and biggest in India. The article The
Exhilaration of Dread is a study of the narrative form and film style of
the modern urban action films, emanating from Bombay. It appears to me that the
article as a whole is composed in rather loose style. Ideas about city and city
life and films come in and out of the article in a random style. In this
particular article, Vasudevan talks about audience, duality of
audience-entertainment relation, progress and shift of style in narrative
techniques, play of city on the psyche of audience and spectator and spaces
used in these action films.*
(*
: Source: Internet)
Article : The Exhilaration of Dread: Genre,
narrative form and film style in contemporary urban action films
Introduction
This article deals with the relationship
of audience with the form of film, transformation in narrative structures, new
awareness and knowledge these films brought about, relationship between space,
politics and realism, and such films. The article is analysed and personal
reflections are added.
Audience’s
relationship with the Entertainment form
Vasudevan situates this study in the Bombay film industry of 1980s.
Audience of those times is seen as having a dual
identity relationship with films. While enjoying the film as spectator, they
also are injected with anxiety about the life in the city. These action films
of 80s provided the audience with ample opportunities to enjoy the pleasures of
viewership, provided all kinds of entertainment, songs, sensual satisfaction,
etc. But along with these incentives, films also filled the audience with a
sense of dread- ‘a gathering sense of anxiety’ according to Vasudevan. This
sounds quite realistic as a film is a reflection of real city life. The dangers
of city are not visible to everyone. A film could very well spell out such
fears. So the audience becomes more and more aware of what goes on around them.
This awareness makes them look around with anxiety and they see more than they
were seeing earlier. This is what a genre of films over a long period of time
could do to a people.
Narrative structures
From the article, we could allude
that the earlier narrative techniques used in Indian films were usually based
on binary opposites. Examples given are: east/west, country/city,
police/criminal, public/private, etc. These binaries bind the form of the film
itself to a certain frame. He points at the depressed and dystopian urban
subjectivity of Bombay of mid 80s as a reason for this shift. Thus, in the new
sensitivity, there were no clear-cut differences between the good and the evil.
Good also could be a failure. Legitimate reasons and aspirations also could end
up in death and un-fulfilment- as reality is most of the times. In this way, I
would say, Indian films began to look at real life in films.
The new style was basically
confusion! This confusion was based on the portrayal of continuity between the
binary opposites, shown earlier as belonging to water tight compartments.
Vasudevan says, this conveys a sense of the contemporary urban imaginary as a
kind of maze. In fact, it is not only a maze, but also a mess. Unstable and dangerous subjectivity governed the anxiety of
audience.
New awareness
These city action films made the
audience aware that all are vulnerable to the terrors of the city. Fear,
terror, unimagined danger, etc are part of the city, and anyone could be into
it at any time or the day or night. The displacement of focus from binary
opposites to related continuities left the audience without explanations.
Consequently, vulnerability became the awareness. Vasudevan says, this has
something to do with the way life is imagined in the city. Films have used acts
of terror and fright to generate both fear and pity! Parinda is cited as an example. An act of terror invites the
fascination of the audience in many ways- the burning of Anna’a wife and son.
The psychosis of Anna is attributed to this act. But we don’t know if it is
real or fake. However, this psychosis gives him the right to dominate others.
Vasudevan also says that there is
always an extra diegetic in films- a force or intelligence that drives the
narrative in its ways. It can be director, conventions or its transmutation. Important thing is that, this intelligence
appears to assume that the source of terror in the city always slips away,
beyond the field of knowledge, into some cavernous other space. This is so
real, and is noticeable in our films. The villain is not the real cause of the
terror. There is another force or intelligence that designs all these. That
force seems to be evading the camera, and the final resolution. It awaits
another chance to come back, leaving our apprehensions open ended.
Space in Bollywood
Here, Vasudevan tries to bring symbolic narrative dimensions and narration
mechanism in terms of links between key Spaces
used often in films. Those spaces familiar to terror and dread are police
stations, dark alleys, courts, busy market, den of criminals, etc. These place
have gained the representational capacity to speak for themselves now. Why
space becomes important for audience? It’s because, no space is a safe space.
There is a surveillance mechanism that penetrates through every kind of walls
and secrecy. So the basic assumption in such films is that you are being
watched everywhere- home, office, market, bus, train, even hide outs. This
overarching gaze presupposes the characters’ ability to receive the hints of
him/her being watched. No space is a safe space- for characters and audience!
Physical space is redefined and reinterpreted in the narrative as the
internal space of the characters, and in turn as that of the audience. Codes
available elsewhere are used to generate terror of physical space- resembling
interior space. The logical structures of the underworld and the physical
(architectural) structures in which the underworld functions are connected to
each other by the fashion the latter is filmed. The dark alleys, shadowy rooms,
carefully arranged careless halls, atmosphere of dampness, cobwebbed attics,
etc. stand for the interior- psychology of those involved in such places. The
audience is dragged into such spaces, both physically and mentally. This is
terrible.
Vasudevan mentions why the gothic lineage of these structures is
significant. These spaces disclose the inner logic of their narrative worlds.
He also quotes Mazumdar as arguing that all these are self conscious drawing on
of codes generated elsewhere (post-war American genre of film noir). That is,
using codes that are historically available for us. Wherever the origin is,
such films have changed the texture of our viewing pattern.
Space and Audience
The history of Hindi filmdom is
punctuated by formal transformations in the technology and style of
international cinema. Global availability of ‘new’ changed things within India.
70s saw a transformation in filmic representation of Bombay, to accommodate the
emergence of a character and urban subjectivity: says Vasudevan. Within this
‘new,’ the city remained a stage, rather than becoming a realistically evoked
space. The reasons could be our tradition in drama based film making. City
space, though considerably expanded within films, still worked as a background
for new types of conflict, subjectivity, etc.
One of the interesting notes of
Vasudevan is that in such films, the audience is not left in their seats in the
cinema, to look figures cast against a background. They are drawn into the film
they are to flow amongst objects and figures within the space-rime of the
fictive world. This involving cinema drags audience to interact with the form
of cinema. The familiar sights on screen and expected responses transport us.
Narrative comes to a halt. It becomes spatialised. Later, it takes the audience
to engage in a dialogue with the space, and the objects within it. This is
because the space in these movies is the urban space, which is integral to the
urban dweller. So it is easy for urban audience to get into a discourse with
the space.
Climate and space
The climatic condition of the urban
space is also important to films. They help to generate moods. The space which
is already associated with various moods, when painted with climatic
conditions, there emerges another texture which qualifies the space.
Railway station
Railway track and station are extensively used to
indicate the proximity of death, terror and danger in everyday life - Existential
condition of city life/the urban. The presence of railway in the city is used
to create a sense of the everyday vulnerability of the crowded city to the
railway accident. As described in the article, the villain could get rid of the
key witness in a case against him, by plunging a cigarette into the witness’
hand. The city trains are naturally jam-packed. The victim had to leave his
hand in unexpected pain and he falls out and dies- as easy as that. A natural
accident is created. Such scenes suggest more than the chances of everyday
life- something precarious, something unsaid. Probably, this kind of
suggestions have increased the urban anxiety even while enjoying every moment
of it.
Railway tracks run parallel to each
other, and parallel to urban life. A derailing of either of these parallels
could pose danger to each other. This is an aspect of urban life. When camera
moves parallel to the track, there is double presence accompanying the
audience.
Realism and Reality
Effects
Use of realism in the 80s is attributed to the
attempts to reduce explanatory force. The phenomenon of place being abstracted
into a non-identifiable space of the globalised imagination took place in the
early 90s. But in the urban action films, there is a strong orientation to
local constructions of the city, mainly because Bombay functions as part of a
national imaginary. Realism in such sense is there in the movies. Then comes
the reality effects. These are auditory or visual cues which suggest that which
is unexplained, that which doesn’t directly link with the characters. These
effects enhance the experience of the movie space. This can afford to perceive
incidental space, unlike realism procedure.
Another issue discussed here is how social world and terror tend to
overlap everyday. Since the movie locates itself in the city which the audience
is familiar with, the characters who are in danger are similar to the audience
in the cinema. The same audience who sit in the theatre may be unaware of the
dangers that are passing just outside or over the theatre. May be in their
courtyard, a gang is hiding to attack another gang or even his/her family!
Thus, such films problematise the inside/outside world in the city. Here we see
how realism is used or adapted to the popular multi-diegetic format of the
hindi films, using spaces of multiple narrations, to insert the spectator into
the cinematic imagining of the city.
Politics
The article, from the beginning
hints about the politics of the city influencing film and the other way around.
Character
formation and space composition are influenced by the current political
scenario. The single
hero, wandering in the city of the 70s is replaced in the 80s with a group of
youngsters sitting in city corners. This sense of joint political action has
gone into films. This is seen as an echo of the worldview of the Shiv Sena in
Bombay. The VP Singh government’s attempts to implement the Mandal Commission
report and the subsequent uprising are other backgrounds to such political
developments in these films. Cinema gains lofty position in giving an overview
of political scenario in the city. As we see in the film Satya, the camera is placed above the Deity of Ganesha, to look
upon the scene of chaos, where the gangster turned politician is bleeding to death.
Here, camera along with the audience is privileged to see what people in the
mess cannot see. People are made to witness this terror from another angle
altogether. Head on
engagement between present/ politics/ screen and audience has been a recurrent subtheme
of our films.
The Cycle
Blackie
was just out of the nest when his girl friend Golda came round and rubbed her
beak on his neck. He felt so happy and energized that morning. It seemed an
easy opening to the day. Dew and cold wind were taking an early leave that day.
‘Crows are a privileged race. We can see everything around,’ thought Blackie as
he looked at Golda’s beautiful eyes.
As
horizon made itself visible under the orange red sky, a thousand stories took
off their flight into life. Blackie knew he had a long and interesting day
ahead. He had to go around hunting for food and stories. Most of those stories
used to amuse him very much.
One
such story was taking off in John’s house too. Yes, Blackie could see John’s
house from his nest. That little house is painted peach-puff. How cute a house
it is! Golda came near him and asked, “what are you looking at?” Blackie said,
“Ah! Look at you; you are interested in having a look at John. Let us go and
see.” Golda was interested and enthused. She liked human kids. Once she has
even fed a child with what she gathered! Both of them flew to John’s house.
John
is a little kid. He’s only 8 years old. Of course he is a cute child. His smile
has powers to take you off your feet and throw you into the sweetest of smiles.
“Hush, you can see him. Come, look at that window”, said Blackie.
The
morning wind was blowing strong through the window into the house. The window
curtain flutters in a jolly rhythm. We can see glimpses of John’s bed. He has
covered himself with a blanket. “Oh... What is that sound? An alarm?” asked Golda.
“Yes. That’s an alarm. See, John is sticking his hand out of the blanket and
switching the alarm off. Haha, he must be terribly sleepy,” observed Blackie,
smiling. John switched the alarm off, turned around and slept again.
Golda
often wondered why human beings were so addicted to sleep. Every day, he gets
up at the first ray of red on the sky, because he knows he needs to do so.
These human beings! But John is a little kid. He can do so, thought Golda.
As
they kept looking, they saw light coming on in his room. His mother came into
the room calling him to get up. He didn’t seem to pay heed to that. Look at
that! She pulled his blanket away. “Now he has to get up. Like us, he too has
to go work,” said Blackie. Mother pulled him up and made him sit up on the bed.
John’s face looked very sleepy. He pulled his hands up and wiped his eyes and
face in an unsuccessful effort to throw his sleep away. Yet he yawned and
yawned, trying to wake up! Golda was quite amused.
It
was then, that he suddenly pulled out something from under his pillow. He
looked at it carefully, and sleep seemed to be instantly away from him. It was
a little toy cycle. Sitting with that toy in hand, he looked up to see the
wall. There was a big poster of a cycle on the wall. He looked at it. There was
a mysterious smile on his face when he did so. He got up from his bed, put the toy
cycle on the cupboard along with other toys and went to the toilet.
Golda
thought about what human life meant after all. They are so mechanic and
calculative. What fun do they have? Always doing the same things in a boring
way. Why can’t they follow their instincts and be happy like crows? She was
awakened from her thoughts by the slamming of a door. John is out of his bath,
wrapping himself in a towel. He got ready wearing his school uniform. This is
the only thing Golda liked about human kids. They all look alike when at
school.
Blackie
and Golda had to change their positions to get a vision of John when he came
out of his room into the dining room. His mother was there preparing something
for him to eat. That was something both Blackie and Golda did not like. They
ate dry bread with some colour pasted on that! ‘That would be the last resort
for us,’ said Golda.
Mother was serving
him with sandwiches. John was not so happy and energetic today. He went around
with gloomy face as if something grave went wrong. His mother urged him to eat
well, but he was not so happy to do so. Mother noticed this. She too had a
mysterious smile on her face. He got up
from his table without finishing what was given. So mother had to force him to
drink some milk. Golda told Blackie that they would love their children in the
same manner. Blackie smiled at her.
Now
John was ready to leave home with his bag stuffed with books. Mother added to
the weight, by giving him his lunch. Blackie and Golda flew to a tree to get
better view of John getting out of home. He gloomily waved to his mother, who
rushed in soon after he left. Humans- they always hurry, reflected Blackie.
John
was walking on the way, head down- still gloomy about something. He often felt
something in his pocket. Golda felt curious about what was in his pocket. So
next time he took it out, she took a close flight and discovered that it was
the same toy cycle he took out from under his pillow. “So that’s what he is
gloomy about” thought Golda. She has seen many kids becoming extremely happy
and excited about riding those two wheeled vehicles which they called cycles.
It looked quite funny, but kids liked it very much.
Near
the street coffee shop, John saw a cycle parked on the road side and was much
attracted to it. He went near it and was admiring it. He closed his eyes as if
he is dreaming of something. Just then, his friends passed that way on cycles,
shouting at him to hurry to school. John looked at his watch and rushed to
school.
He was late to
class. Golda couldn’t control her laughter when John responded to attendance
call from the door. If Blackie hadn’t rebuked her, she would have made hell of
a noise near John’s class room. In the class too, John wasn’t a happy and
naughty kid like others.
Golda
admired the rows and coloums of kids wearing uniforms. She wished to have kids
like that- all in same attire. She would feed all of them one by one in rows
and columns along with Blackie. Golda went deep into imagination.
She
was suddenly awakened by the bell of the school, along with the hustle of
children rushing out of their classes. It was the end of the class. Everyone
rushed out of class, except John. He took his time to gather his things and to
pack his bag. He went alone out of the class room and walked gloomily to home.
How sad, thought Blackie. He wanted to console him, but he knew John won’t
appreciate a crow’s consolation!
While
John was walking to the gate, Blackie and Golda had to go to the school ground
to hunt for a few morsels to fill their stomachs. From the morning, John was
keeping them busy, so that they never found time to eat anything. Gathering a
few mouthfuls, they rushed to follow John. He was walking through the same way
he came. It was a sad sight to see such a cute child walking head down, sad and
gloomy.
He
reached the coffee shop. He could see people coming out of the coffee shop
talking and happily walking. He stopped to look at that. Blackie and Golda sat
on top of a tree and were watching him. Out of the blue, someone came from
behind and picked John up. Blackie was alarmed. But Golda told him to cool
down, “it’s his mother.” Blackie let out a sigh of relief. Last week he had
seen another child like John being taken away like this. It was a horrific
incident. They took that child and mutilated it in a dark room outside the city.
The child was screaming in pain. He hated human beings for that. He didn’t even
share that incident with Golda, as she won’t be able to bear such a story.
“Look
Blackie, they are going into the coffee shop” said Golda. Blackie saw that both
John and his mother were inside the shop, sitting on a table facing each other.
Mother was asking something to John. But John wasn’t in a happy mood to answer
her. It would be difficult for any mother to see her child like that, thought
Golda.
Mother
ordered coffees for both of them. They were having coffee. All of a sudden, the
mother got up and led John outside the shop, blindfolding him. Blackie and
Golda got curious to see what is going to happen now. Mother led him to the
courtyard of the shop, led him to a corner and opened his blindfold. John
opened his eyes to see a cycle- all decorated and shining. He couldn’t
understand what the meaning was. He looked back at his mother. She smiled and
gave a nod. John went near the cycle and was amazed to see a tag hanging on it
with these words on it, “for my little sweet heart, John.”
John
couldn’t control his joy. His eyes were full. He turned to his mother and
embraced her in joy. Both were so happy to be in each other’s arms. Golda
pecked on Blackie’s face and said, “Blackie, I love this moment.” Blackie’s
eyes were filled. He kissed her beak and said, “Golda, that’s love. What flows
from their eyes- that’s love.” They looked at the mother and John for a few
moments and flew into the sky.
Gold
looked down to see the John and his mother still in the embrace. She felt so
happy. Blackie felt that the day was so fruitful that they could witness such a
sweet story. They flew up into the sky, carrying the love John and his mother
shared outside the coffee shop. As they flew up, they could see the setting sun
drawing beautiful patterns in the sky. Blue and orange and red. Blackie looked
at Golda in love. She winked her eyes, feeling her little ones inside her. They
added to the palette drawn by the sun on the sky, as they flew high into the
sky.
-----THE END-----
A Critical Analysis of Arogyasri Health Insurance Scheme - A Project of Andhra Pradesh State Government
(A Project of Andhra Pradesh Government in India)
|
This study is published as a chapter in the book titled "Health and the Media:Essays on the Effects of Mass Communication."
 |
| Click to Buy |
The details are:
Title: Health and the Media: Essays on the Effects of Mass Communication
Publisher: McFarland (26 May 2016)Place: Jefferson, North CarolinaEditors: Print Length: 260 pages
- Language: English
- ASIN: B01GKC7HI4
Monday, February 20, 2012
Audience and Spectator in South India: A short Study
Sajit M. Mathews
Introduction
With regard to South Indian
cinema, the terms ‘audience’ and ‘spectator’ gain much importance as they
determined and continue to determine the fate of the art and the course it
should take in the future. From the times when cinema was silent, it was the role
of the audience (in some cases, spectator) that remained stable and unchanging.
Trends came and disappeared. Stars appeared and vanished. But audience
remained. The interesting phenomenon of the audience in the South, which shares
meanings with spectator, fan, citizen, admirer, rowdy, supporter and even protector is worth detailed study.
The Cambridge Advanced Learner’s Dictionary
(2003 Edition) defines ‘Audience’ as: ‘the
group of people gathered in one place to watch or listen to a play, film,
someone speaking, etc., or the (number of) people watching or listening to a
particular television or radio programme, or reading a particular book’ and
‘Spectator’ as: ‘a person who watches an
activity, especially a sports event, without taking part’.[1]
Wikipedia’s definition of Audience is more elaborate and throws more light
into our kind of study.[2]
It says ‘An audience is a group of people who participate in a show or encounter a work of art, literature, theatre, music or academics in any medium. Audience participate in different ways in different
kinds of art; some events invite overt audience participation and others allowing only modest clapping and criticism and reception. Media audiences are studied by academics in media audience studies. ‘Audience theory’ also offers scholarly insight into
audiences in general. These insights shape our knowledge of just how audiences
affect and are affected by different forms of art. A spectator is just an observer of an event or person who looks on or watches.
Thus these terms differ in terms of involvement and participation.
Spectatorship and Audience
Spectatorship
within the film theory is a theoretical concept used to consider how film
viewers are constituted and positioned by the textual and representational
aspects of films. It is a fact that the theoretical construct of the spectator
has always been different from the actual spectator in the social, empirical
and historical understanding. Though films are able to dictate how spectator
should view the film, it’s not the case always. Spectator is only a theoretical
category idealized and homogenized as a logical subject produced by the film
itself.[3] If
such a reduction takes place, the question of emergence and engagement of
audience becomes an impossible consideration.
In India, audience has always been
outside this theoretical framework of spectator. From the time of silent
cinema, spectator had been divided into strata. Elite crowd, the
aspiring-to-be-elite crowd and the low class crowd always existed. Especially
in South India, where politics and mass entertainment were always connected,
there has been strong undercurrents which lead (or misled) cinema. Those who
could afford to vocalize their admiration for cinema and the star were named
rowdy. Those who dare not do that stayed elite or close to elite crowd,
‘untarnished’ by these uncouth spectators.
Citizen and audience
Citizen
is defined as member of the general public, possessing inalienable rights.
Theoretically every citizen is entitled to be beneficiaries of these rights and
privileges. But actually, only a minority enjoys these rights. That means there
is a denial of rights to the majority. This majority is the so called ‘low
class’ people of the periphery. These people who live on the fringes of the
society are also human beings who long for fulfillment and power. One such kind
of satisfaction is offered by films. The subaltern hero of the film who
commands upper class men and challenges evil social systems and takes a
beautiful upper class woman as his bride certainly lives up to the aspirations
of the ‘low class.’ They long to destabilize the system that demoralizes and
impoverishes them. And in these films, they find their wishes come true in the
words and actions of a star. They admire this representative of theirs. Citizen
figure (hero) in the film represents these people. The star thus is a means of
addressing the anxiety and anger of being outside the domain of rights.
An
interesting point to be noted here is that the citizen in the film is not like
the people who watch him. The hero begins like an ordinary subaltern ‘low
class.’ Later, he rises to the capability of a citizen. But all through the
transformation, the audience is kept reminded of the fact that hero is a star. This gives him the
necessary power to stand up against power of the upper class.[4]
This gives him the authority to fall in love with an upper class woman. This
also keeps the audience reminded that they are ‘subaltern’ and the star is not
and that such things happen only in films. The status of star automatically
raises the hero above the handicap imposed by community and class identities
and gains ‘citizen’ status for him.
Thus
though the star fulfills the desire of the audience to be citizens, the
audience continues to be alien to their rights, affirmed by the filmic
narration.
Who is a ‘fan’ then?
How do we define a fan?
The whole argument about fan and the way of looking at fan depends on how we
define a fan. It is no wonder that we see a fan as a non-educated lower middle
class male admirer of a film star. But we should not forget the fact that fan
associations were creations of the film industry itself as logical extensions
of star systems. It was motivated by profit. The idea was to make use of fans
to provide free publicity to actors and their projects. Actually, fan played a
major role in the financial success of films. Every ardent fan would be present
at the opening show of a film and they would continue to watch the film
repeatedly, so that their star’s film is a success. The fan participation also
showed whether the film was good or bad.
Though
fans were created by the industry, they have come a long way from being unpaid servants
of the industry.[5]
Fans at times have gone away from the stars and declared their independence. Most
of the fans associations do not stop with mere slogan shouting and poster
publicity. Fans associations had major role in Tamil and Telugu Politics and
Kannada Linguistic Nationalism. They also undertake charitable work and social
work. They have networks sometimes countrywide and sometimes even
international. Thus, the old definitions no more fit today’s fan.
Audience, Star and Fan: Behind and Beyond the Silver Screen
What
then is the relationship between the audience and star? As history tells us,
stars as well as fans were created by the industry. But audience is not the
creation of anyone. Here I would like to create a distinction between audience
and fan. Fan is also part of the audience. But those other than the fan do not
want them to be with counted as audience. Fan thus is pushed a step down the
rung. Audience thus creates another class called fans. Thus, more than fan,
Audience needs attention in this discussion. Audience is the middle class crowd
that names fans ‘fans.’ Audience looks down upon fan for their over-reaction:
Excess. According to audience, fans are thugs, goons and an unruly group. This
audience doesn’t want to get in touch with fans for fear of appropriation. They
criticize them from a distance.
Audience
is not under compulsion. They are not bothered about whether the film succeeds
in the box office or not. They don’t bother about the image of the star. All
they look for is entertainment (generally). As long as they get it, they are
satisfied. They criticize when the film fails to satisfy their taste and
expectation. When the audience is mostly admirers or fans, they see the star
more than the character. When there is an expectation about the actor, the
actor is bound to act according to the expectations of the crowd. Unless the
actor rises up to these aspirations, he will be put down. Therefore the star,
within his constraints, portrays a character which neither thwarts the demands
of the fan, nor irritates the ‘audience’. In short, it is the fan who decides
what kind of role the actor plays on screen.
Where does the audience- other than the fan-
stand in relation with the star? Films have often diffused through the fabric
of the society and created a social image of stars. Consumption of star is not
limited to films. We are able to see stars all around us: in advertisements,
news reports, politics, social gatherings, etc. Cinema magazines are read not
only by fans, but also by the general public, providing space for an
‘off-screen’ life of the star. The image of star, even in the imagination of
the general public is a constructed one. Star has a social image. Everyone
wants to connect to this image. This image is against the divinized image of
the star somewhere far away. Here star is the next door man or woman. In some
cases, audience tries more than identification or escaping into the stars
world, by bringing the star home. In this way, the audience keeps themselves
away from fans and near to the star.
The difference between fan and
audience is subtle. Fan expressions are always in the excess form (as observed
by the audience) - unnecessarily extravagant and hyperbolic whereas audience’s
expressions are in a muted and sober fashion. They show rationality with
purpose. That which the middle class ‘audience’ doesn’t want to be identified
as, is termed fan. Fan thus is a mental projection of the fears and anxieties
of the ‘audience’ of being incorporated into the ‘low class’ crowd who yells
and howls in the cinema hall. This low class audience is also termed as ‘rowdy’
and is kept at a distance. Since audience cannot follow the star as fans do the
demarcation helps.
Conclusion
Cinema
exists as a sign of creative and innovative spirit of human beings. Within the space
of this creative space, we find side roads where strands of human weaknesses.
Here, some powerful people make use of the unprivileged, for their gains. This
kind of manipulation occurs in cinema on and off the screen. In short, the
drama goes on behind and beyond the screen. Audience is the component,
perpetrator and victim of all these complex mechanisms. As times progress and
human spirit thrives towards the ultimate spirit as Hegel puts it, we can
expect pure engagements with society and its creative expressions like cinema.
Audience has a major role in leading film industry into intellectual arenas
unexplored and to bring entertainment and education into cinema halls.
[1]
Cambridge Advanced Learner’s
Dictionary, Cambridge University Press, 2003, Version 1.0
[3]
Hughes, Stephen. P. Unsettling Cinema: a symposium on the place
of cinema in India, Pride of Place, # 525, May 2003.
[4]
Srinivas, S.V. Citizens and Subjects of Telugu Cinema,
Deep Focus: A Film Quarterly, March 2002. P. 63-67.
[5]
Srinivas, S. V. Devotion and Defiance in Fan Activity.
Making Meaning In Indian Cinema. Oxford University Press, USA, 2001.
Cidade de Deus - City of God: Film Review
Rio de
Janeiro
(meaning, River of January) in my mind was a city of god. It was a city of joy,
excitement, modernity and plenty. Any search on internet will give one, a
perfect picture of a city that is affluent, colourful, joyous and plentiful.
But as is the case with any city, there is an underside to this developed face
of Rio too. The blue seas and the cool breeze of the city are actually a facade
that covers up a bunch of stark truths.
Rocket’s life is the life of a city dweller. City for him
is home. And his home is not in the colourful part of the city. Where Rocket
lived, city was coloured grey and sometimes RED with blood. It is the city of
god still, because a number of human beings could make a living in the grey
part of the city. What makes a city that of god is love towards life. What made
the city grey and red was in fact its affinity for life. In Rio’s grey
colonies, its crowds and the hoodlums were all trying to make a living.
Made in a very different style, City of God shows
glimpses of real life from the city. The film made me look away from the screen
many times. Though violence and sex are part of life as is politics and love,
such stark depictions are rare in Indian films. The language used by the
hoodlums’ language, constant fear of death, search for adventure and money,
etc. come out well in the film. I don’t think I would be able to sit through
the film even if I wish to. I will have to train myself to enjoy such film too.
If I made this film, there would be more of suggestions
of violence and death, than actual on screen scenes. The reasons are: either
that Indian culture is mild or that Indian culture tries to look away from
harsh realities- a kind of escapism!
Sajit M. Mathews
Politics in South Indian Cinema: A study of the use of films for political communication
Sajit M. Mathews
Introduction
As we are exposed to the realities
regarding the South Indian Cinema and related political equations through the
readings and class discussions, I think it would be a fruitful exercise to
dwell upon the question, ‘why politics in South Indian Cinema?’ This question
is important as long as we try to understand the phenomenon of South Indian
film industry and South Indian Politics under the same head.
Political background
India is a democratic republic nation where people decide
who will rule when and whom. Under such democratic circumstances, almost all
those who are interested in handling power will try to influence the masses
using all the available means. This is a fundamental right of every Indian
citizen. This influence can be obvious when someone uses a speech to persuade
people and not so obvious when someone already in power uses government
machinery to please people and subtle when someone cleverly uses innovative
means like the media to manipulate the masses. India gained independence from
colonial rule in 1947. Much before that, political polarization started gaining
momentum. The Congress Party had a well established network of activists all
over the country, set up to struggle for freedom. And there were many other
smaller factions of organized and unorganized set-ups which came to the lime
light after the independence.
Filmy background
Films came to India within a year of its invention- in July
1896. The new entertainment was received with mixed feelings at all quarters of
the nation. Within a short time, Madras developed its own films. “The silent
cinema, though it did not have any pretentions to ideological or political
content, certainly had clear overtones of political consciousness.”[1]
During freedom struggle, Gandhi gave emphasis to eradication of social evils,
making social uplift part of political activism. Thus, films that contained
social themes were clearly political in orientation. Madras films started ‘talking’
in 1931 when Kalidas was released.
That marked the beginning of the production of an anthology of Tamil movies. In
the beginning, all the movies were head-on shootings of the existing company
drama performances. In that way, we can’t see much creativity entering studios.
The first Tamil talkie with a contemporary theme was Menaka (1935). Slowly, social themes which had a special
significance in the pre-independence Indian scenario gained in number, even
under strict censorship of the British.[2]
Cinema was seen as a danger to their power by the British and as a new
opportunity to speak to the masses, by the freedom fighters.
Tamil cinema and the DMK
DMK (Dravida
Munnetra Kazhakam) was formed in 1949. The conscious use of films for
political purpose began with C. N. Annadurai’s film ‘Velaikkari’ (1948). With this, the socio-political demands of the
region began to be expressed through the medium of cinema. The films made by
DMK had explicit atheistic and anarchic dialogues, criticizing existing
religion, beliefs, political system and social evils. ‘Velaikkari’ and ‘Parasakthi’ are two of the best examples, scripted
by Annadurai and M. Karunanidhi respectively.
The DMK involvement with the film as a medium had two
distinguishable phases, the first phase (1948-1957) dominated by the film
scripts of Annadurai and Karunanidhi (note that it was in 1957 that DMK entered
electoral politics) and a second one dominated by M.G. Ramachandran. [3] In
the first phase, the oppressive character of both the society and the government
was always highlighted. This was the time when villages were electrified. This
paved the way for the spread of DMK ideology to every nook and corner of the
state, through cinema.
Representation
Madhava Prasad has an interesting argument regarding
representation. Representation can be political and aesthetic. Political
representation is a leader ‘represent’ing people in the parliament. Aesthetic
or cultural representation is in the realm of discourse, texts and images, in
which we ‘re-present’ our world. Such representations are within the frame of a
variety of constraints and thus they neither provide direct access to reality
nor are neutral. They always carry their own ideological biases and emphases.[4]
Films fall under this kind of representation.
There always existed a symbolic relationship between
films and political parties in Tamil Nadu. Films were used in three ways by
political parties: direct political propaganda, reference to party symbols,
leaders etc and mixing of documentary footage with shots of actual film.
Therefore, no wonder why actors were crowd pullers especially to party
conferences.[5]
Within
films, there are subtle developments. The actors, who develop into stars govern
another realm- fan following. Stars always exceed the narrative framework of
the film as a story. The star exists apart from the film and depends only
partially on the story. There are roles played and characters portrayed in a
film. Star plays a role and portrays a character. In the end, star becomes a
representation, above the role and the roles themselves begin to exceed the
requirements of the characterization.[6]
Considering what constituted the growth of MGR as an icon
and idol in Tamil Nadu, we could very well say that films are much more than
mere representations of social realities. MGR who believed that every man had
to have an image, consciously and shrewdly drew up his own image based on the
popular ballads, which appealed to the people. In his own words, “You put
forward an image of yourself if you want to get anywhere.”[7]
Therefore, using the popular images of heroes to reconstitute image that served
elite interests, MGR reached every part of Tamil Nadu through films as a wish
fulfilling hero of the masses. Adding to these, widespread popularization of
him as an icon through biographies, newspapers, pamphlets and posters served in
identifying the person of MGR to the images he put up on the screen.
Politicisation of films
The
article on Parasakthi tells us
clearly that the film succeeded in its pro-DMK campaign. “Its anti-Congress and
anti-religious postures went down well with the enthusiastic audience.”[8]
People went to theatres to listen to the dialogues of M. Karunanidhi, rather
than to watch the movie. Cinema hall almost fell apart with loud applause,
whenever there were references to the politics of Annadurai. Particularly this
film used many symbols to criticise the existing social system and government.
There are references to idolatry, corrupt politicians, merchant, insincere
religious, immoral society and the general degradation of once prosperous and
highly moral Tamil Society (Nadu).
Thus,
a trend started with Velaikkari (1948)
and Parasakthi (1952). The transition from a social movement to a political
party, from DK to DMK is what Parasakthi
helped in bringing about. We could see a lot of sharp criticism as well as
ideological compromises, depicted cleverly in the film. These compromises were
forerunners of the new political appearance of the Kazhakam. The film stood as
a signboard in the historical course of the Dravidian Movement, pointing to the
consensual politics DMK was destined to play in Tamil Nadu.[9]
The
political communication rendered by the DMK was political communication as
persuasion, when they did not enjoy political power. This persuasion was to
urge the hitherto stable masses to take a political stand in voting for the
party- a kind of suggestive communication. by definition, feature films have
two levels of meaning: one within the film and another in relation to the
political reality of the day. DMK used the second level meaning in dramatic
narrative films, without openly portraying oppresionist situations. These films
had powerful psychological influence on the audience. They left cinemas with
clear ideological realisations.
These
films revolutionised the structure and content of Tamil films by portraying the
dynamism of the downtrodden through the fists of MGR and words of Karunanidhi.
In other words, Karunanidhi gave arguments and MGR gave the ‘how’ of uplift of
the downtrodden. These films, while criticising the social oppression and
exploitation, also underscored the necessity to bring back those ancient
virtues enshrined in Tamil culture. [10]
Conclusion
In
short, Tamil films stand as a historical image which used a popular medium for
political communication. Political and literary genius acting together to
influence the psyche of the masses! And the continued reign of DMK, ADMK and
AIADMK tells us that this innovative method works and is very powerful. A long
time film star reigned the state for over ten years. Still the memories of
those subaltern heroes linger in the emotional and physical terrain of Tamil
Nadu. Thus Tamil ideological front used film as an effective medium to
communicate with masses.
[2]
Ibid.
[3]
Ibid, p:10.
[4]
Prasad, Madhava. M. Cine-Politics: On the Political
Significance of Cinema in South India, Journal of Moving Images, P: 51.
[5]
Pandian, M.S.S. Culture and Subaltern
Consciousness: An Aspect of MGR Phenomenon, Economic and Political Weekly.
Vol. 24, No. 30, July 29, 1989. P: 63.
[6]
Prasad, Madhava. P: 51.
[7]
Pandian, M.S.S. P: 64.
[8]
Pandian, M.S.S. Parasakthi: Life and Times of DMK Film, Making Meaning in Indian
Cinema, P. 74.
[9]
Ibid. P:93.
[10]
Sivathamby, P: 10.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Being Poor Isn't That Bad!
It was about 11 am. The bell rang. It was the postman. I was waiting for him for a week. I had subscribed to Mathrubhumi Weekly a couple of...
-
Krashen's i+1 Krashen's view is that language development takes place only through reception of comprehensible input. If i is the c... -
അറിവാണ് മനുഷ്യനെ മുൻപനും പിൻപനും ആക്കുന്നത്. ഡിഗ്രി ഉള്ളവന് അതില്ലാത്തവനെ പുച്ഛം നിറഞ്ഞ നോട്ടം നോക്കാൻ ഉള്ള അവകാശം ഉണ്ടോ? വിദ്യാഭ്യാസം ഇല്ല... -
എന്റെ മകളുടെ കഥകളിൽ ആർക്കെങ്കിലും വിഷമമോ പ്രതിസന്ധികളോ ഉണ്ടായാൽ അവൾ ഉടനെ "കപീഷേ രക്ഷിക്കണേ..." എന്ന് പറയും. ഉടനെ കപീഷിന്റെ വാൽ ന...