|
WSWS : Arts
Review : Film
Reviews
Fire: A film which bears witness to Deepa Mehta's courage
as an artist
By Piyaseeli Wijegunasingha
2 May 2000
Use
this version to print
The following review of Deepa Mehta's 1996 film Fire
was originally published in Sinhalese in Kamkaru Mawatha
, the newspaper of the Socialist Equality Party in Sri Lanka,
on May 29 and June 12, 1998.
The internationally acclaimed film, which was released uncut
in India, played for three weeks before Hindu fundamentalist formations
denounced it as obscene, immoral and offensive to Indian culture
and the Hindu religion, and attempted to have it banned.
The extreme right-wing Shiv Sena movement organised demonstrations,
forcing the closure of several Bombay and New Delhi cinemas. It
issued a statement declaring: If women's physical needs
are fulfilled through lesbian acts, the institution of marriage
will collapse and the reproduction of human beings will stop.
Members of the organisation stormed cinemas, tearing down
posters and smashing windows. Demonstrations were organised outside
the home of one of the film's stars. Protesters threatened two
actors and a director who publicly defended the film. Mehta also
received a number of death threats. The film was withdrawn from
cinemas, pending another censorship review, but later re-released
uncut. Extreme-right wing elements are still trying to have the
film banned.
Fire was the first of a trilogy of films by Mehta set in
India. Earth , the second in the series, was released in
1998 and the third, Water , was due to begin shooting in
Uttar Pradesh early this year. In late January Hindu fundamentalists
wrecked her set in Varanasi, claiming that the film, about the
plight of poverty-stricken widows in the 1930s, would be anti-Hindu.
The Uttar Pradesh government claimed that Mehta was responsible
for the disorder and banned production of the film in that state.
Mehta has vowed to make the film and plans to resume filming at
another location in India later in the year.
The World Socialist Web Site is campaigning to defend
Mehta (see statement: Oppose
Hindu extremist attacks on Indian filmmaker), insisting
that fundamental issues of democratic rights and artistic freedom
are involved.
Deepa Mehta's film Fire, when it was released in 1997,
became a focus of attention of film lovers and critics the world
over. Some time ago the film was shown at the Majestic Cinema
in Colombo, Sri Lanka. The film, which has India as its background,
and is made in English, deals with the development of a loving
sexual relationship between two Indian women. The extraordinary
courage shown by Mehta who wrote and directed the film has made
Fire a fascinating artistic experience, and has also won
for the director the admiration of art lovers the world over.
The film centres on events in the life of a Hindu family living
in the outskirts of Delhi. A character in the filmJutin,
describes this family as a joint family. In this kind
of family, which as a result of the uneven development of India
contains feudal social vestiges combined with the bourgeois way
of life, the parents, married children and their families all
live together under one roof.
The family portrayed in the film consists of an aged bed-ridden
mother, her two sons Ashok (Kulbhushan Karbandha) and Jutin (Javed
Jaffri) and their wives. A manservant called Mundu who helps with
the household chores also lives in the house. The family depends
for its livelihood on the income from a fast-food outlet and a
video rental business adjoining the house. The elder son Ashok
manages the business while the younger son helps him. Their respective
wives, Radha (Shabana Asmi) and Sita (Nandita Das), prepare the
food for the fast-food outlet.
Jutin, behind the back of his elder brother, has turned the
video rental into a den of illegal transactions where blue films
are rented out to young children. Jutin, who is unmarried at the
beginning of the film, spends part of the money he acquires this
way to maintain a relationship with a woman hairdresser called
Julie who has immigrated with her parents to India from Hong Kong.
The elder brother Ashok spends a considerable amount of his
income to look after a religious guru whom he closely associates
with and is in the habit of visiting regularly. Ashok tries to
impress on his family that his obviously eccentric relationship
with the guru would help to detach himself from sensual pleasures
and ultimately attain universal truth. When doctors
reveal that Radha is unable to bear children, Ashok becomes a
brahmacharinone who relies on refraining completely
from sex to gain religious and spiritual advancement. Apparently
he has turned his wife's incapacity to conceive into a ladder
on which to climb up to moksha or spiritual freedom. As
part of this exercise he forces his wife to lie beside him on
the bed so as to prove to himselfaccording to Gandhian traditionhis
powers of resisting sensual desires. Radha, to all
appearance a traditional woman, consents to her husband's demand,
but the viewer can clearly sense the burning sense of injustice
consuming her.
Jutin's girl friend Julie, who has absorbed bourgeois tastes
and habits, will not consent to marry into a traditional joint-family.
When Ashok entreats Jutin to marry, so as to provide the family
with a son to carry on the family name, he weds Sita and brings
her home while continuing his relationship with Julie. Sitaa
cheerful, light hearted, lovable young woman is rather out of
place in the sombre and gloomy atmosphere of the traditional household
until she manages to build up a friendly relationship with her
sister-in-law.
Jutin cruelly snubs Sita's attempts to build up a close relationship
with him. Only when the elder brother reminds him of the necessity
of having a son does Jutin condescendingly approach Sita with
the intention of having sex. Jutin seems to gloat over the fact
that he is only fulfilling his family's wish in having sex with
Sita. Needless to say his sexual behavior revolts the spectator.
Sita is capable of uncovering the reasons behind the peculiarities
in Jutin's behavior only after some time.
The spectator senses the sometimes open and often veiled derision
of the two husbands towards their respective wives. The main theme
of the film Fire is the development of a mutually supportive
and affectionate relationship between the two women, a relationship
that is gradually transformed into sexual love.
Mundu becomes aware of the nature of the relationship between
the two women and informs the master of the house, who then spies
on the women. Radha has to bear the brunt of Ashok's jealous and
bitter anger. The seemingly harmonious life of the family is shattered
and the two women decide to go away to a distant place and begin
life anew on their own. On the day they plan to leave Radha suggests
that Sita leave the house first so Radha can try and explain
things to Ashok.
Radha's attempt to explain things to Ashok only
leads to a terrible quarrel. It is clear that Ashok, who is deeply
disturbed after witnessing the sexual behavior of the two women,
is in no mood to listen to Radha's explanations.
The quarrel between Radha and Ashok takes place in the kitchen
and Radha's saree unexpectedly catches fire. Ashok who had been
asserting all his male authority to substantiate his condemnation
of Radha is unable even to raise a hand to put out the flames
enveloping her.
It is significant that precisely at this moment the spectator
is made aware that the fire enveloping Radha is being transformed
(by the maker of the film) into a character of the filma
character with a symbolic significance. No doubt the fact that
the film has been named Fire also helps the spectator to
arrive at this awareness.
According to ancient Hindu tradition, fire or Agni is the constantly
present purifying god of the household on whom also falls the
task of bearing witness to the chastity of women and accordingly
deciding their fates. In the ancient Indian epic Ramayana
it is the heroine Sita (Rama's wife who had been forcibly taken
away by Ravana the king of Lanka and kept in his palace as a prisoner
for a considerable time) on her return to Rama's kingdom, has
to prove her chastity by Agni-Pareeksha (literally
a test by firethe accused is made to enter a fire and emerge
unhurt to prove her innocence). Agni does not harm Sita, thus
proving her chastity. Similarly in the film, Agni, by not harming
Radha establishes her chastity. Agni releases Radha from his flames
physically safe and sound, though her blackened saree and smudged
face bear traces of the ordeal. Radha is able to meet Sita as
previously arranged.
It is clear that the artist herself speaks through Agni. Here
it is necessary to emphasise that the artist's unreserved sympathy
for Radha also finds full justification in the realistic portrayal
of social forces in the film. The film sequence of the Agni
Pareeksha, which carries to a dramatic climax the chain
of events in the householdcontains within it the ability
to passionately involve the viewer in the portrayed situation;
and this ability bears witness to the integrity of Deepa Mehta
as an artist.
It is obvious that God Agni, in giving his verdict in favor
of Radha, has aligned himself with a traditionally frowned upon
relationship (between Radha and Sita), rejecting outright the
institutionalised relationship between husband and wife (Ashok
and Radha). Thus Agni endorses a relationship, which, although
not traditionally accepted in class society, is honest, aesthetically
appealing and spiritually rich against a dishonest, spiritually
bankrupt, institutionalised traditional relationship in class
society. Therefore the Agni we come to know in the film Fire
is a revolutionary god.
The relationship between Radha and Sita, as it is portrayed
in the film, wins not only the whole-hearted sympathy of the spectator
but also unreserved respect. The great artistic power of Fire
lies in its ability to make the spectator sympathise and respect
a relationship that in ordinary day-to-day life is generally not
approved of.
Some critics have described Fire as a film that supports
lesbianism. Fire sympathetically depicts the development
of a loving sexual relationship between two women, but the film's
success is not simply due to this fact. The film's artistic power
lies in its appeal for enlightened, loving and spiritually satisfying
relationships between human beings.
The realistic depiction by the film of institutionalised traditional
relationships in class society generates within the spectator
revulsion and hatred towards such relationships.
The brutal and revolting nature of the sexual relationship
bound up with institutionalised traditional marriage in class
society is powerfully revealed through Jutin's sexual attitude
towards his wife. The mental agony undergone by Radha in having
to lie beside Ashok in bed so as to provide him with an opportunity
to prove to himself his powers of resisting sensual pleasures
is powerfully conveyed through Shabana Asmi's sensitive and controlled
acting.
The two brothers consider the nursing of their aged, bed-ridden
mother to be the duty of their wives. We never see Jutin speak
a gentle word to his mother. Radha nurses her mother-in-law like
one fulfilling a ritual.
The family depicted in Fire is fundamentally an economic
unit, bound together by an enfeebled system of mutual social duties
and it easily succumbs to the pressures borne out of its contradictions.
The film's appeal is certainly not for unconventional relationships
against conventional ones. The sexual relationship between Jutin
and Juliethough unconventional is also depicted as one devoid
of love, gentleness and beautymerely seeking the gratification
of brutal sexual instincts. The maker of the film has consciously
sought to contrast the loving sexual relationship developing between
Radha and Sita with the sexual relationship existing between Jutin
and Julie. That the film's appeal is for enlightened, loving and
spiritually satisfying relationships between human beings is crystal
clear.
In an interview published in the Sunday Leader on March
8, 1998 Deepa Mehta said it had become an unpleasant task for
her to counter interpretations of Fire as a film that idealised
and promoted lesbianism.
I love the film Fire. I am proud of my film. The
questions you raise prompted by your middle class upbringing forces
me to defend Fire. This is a situation I do not like at
all. I am not obliged to defend any thing in the film Fire.
The question here is not whether one chooses to engage in homosexual
and heterosexual relationships or whether one chooses to engage
in only heterosexual relationships. The question is the necessity
to choose a life of dignity and self-fulfillment.
This film does not speak for lesbianism. It is also not
necessary for me to play down the lesbian relationship between
the two women; but my film does not say if one is caught in a
bad marriage relationship one should begin a homo-sexual relationship.
I am not a feminist who downgrades men. I think men are as important
as women.
The performance of a folk play based on the mythical Rama-Sita
story in the film also helps deepen the spectator's understanding
of the destructive results of the oppression of women in class
society. This kind of folk play has long been part of the traditional
social life of the Indian masses and lays bare their thoughts
and feelings. In the play Rama says: Agni bore witness to
your [Sita's] chastity. Even so, I have to banish you. A
woman in the film viewing the folk play cries as Sita is banished.
It is not difficult to understand that she is in some way identifying
herself with Sita.
The servant Mundu represents another facet of life in bourgeois
society. He is even more oppressedeconomically, socially
and culturallythan the two women, Radha and Sita, who belong
to a relatively better off layer of middle class society. Through
Mundu's character is depicted the intellectual and emotional retardedness,
as well as certain psychological maladies, produced in man by
the outmoded bourgeois social system.
The talents of actors and actresses have contributed much towards
the artistic power of the film. Shabana Asmi and Nandita Das not
only bring to life the characters they portray but also accomplish
the difficult task of winning the viewer's sympathy and respect
for a sexual relationship between two women.
Fire also enables the spectator to breathe in the social
atmosphere of an Indian suburb. The folk play Rama and Sita,
and the marriage procession (Radha and Sita watch it from the
balcony of their house) that takes to the streets at night enlivened
by song and dance deserve special mention. Radha and Sita, dressed
in gleaming colorful sarees with necklaces and bangles to match,
are a visual treat. India has inherited not only a tradition of
repressing sensual desires and seeking Moksha, but also
a tradition of refined aesthetic enjoyment of life.
The film sequence of an early morning backed up with appropriate
music by A.R. Rahman is also memorable. As night fades, along
the motorway bathed in early morning light, an unending line of
vehicles including three-wheelers and motor cycles speed towards
the town. Not only the motorway and the vehicles but also the
advertisements put up on the sides of the motorway bespeak the
pathetic attempt by an underdeveloped backward nation to ape the
developed bourgeois countries. As the neighborhood emerges from
its slumbers we see Mundu covering himself with a sheet of cloth
seated on the doorstep waiting for the milkman to arrive. The
light in the sky thickens as if pregnant, not only with secrets
carried on from by-gone days, but also with a new life striving
to be born.
Radha and Sita as we see them at the end of the film are clearly
marked by the harrowing experiences they have been through. Radha's
sad and discolored face speaks volumes of the deep hurt and humiliation
embedded in her heart. Sita's usually cheerful face is unsmiling
and grave. The old dilapidated building where the two women meet
each other is made even more gloomy and doleful by an unexpected
downpour. The spectator is left in no doubt that the road ahead
for the two women will not be an easy and smooth one.
See Also:
Filmmaker Deepa Mehta replies
to the Times of India: "I am determined to make the
film"
[13 April 2000]
Filmmaker speaks with the
WSWS:
Hindu extremist campaign forces director Deepa Mehta to suspend
filming in India
[10 April 2000]
World Socialist Web Site
issues appeal:
Oppose Hindu extremist attacks on Indian filmmaker Deepa Mehta
[28 February 2000]
Top of page
The WSWS invites your comments.
Copyright 1998-2008
World Socialist Web Site
All rights reserved |