Watched the movie,
Water, last night.
Its one of the Deepa Mehta, element n-ologies, that was nominated for an Oscar for the best foreign film, as a Canadian Entry.
While I had specifically decided to enjoy the movie, as it unfolded and not be critical of it, a few themes got me thinking over and over again.
So, I shall attempt to pass this off as a GRE practice essay, since I am desperate to pen down my thoughts, lest they get lost in the jungles of IIT thoughts.
The movie deals with, the widows of Benaras and their oppression, in the late 1930s. The whole setting is wonderfully reconstructed, though I didn't really figure out what Water had to do with it.
It no doubt had a commanding screen presence and makes an appearance in many scenes. It probably also symbolises, the Hindu religion, that although expansive and well-defined in its flow, can be skillfully shaped up, to the needs of those who read the scriptures - the Brahmins.
It might represent the time-frame of a widow's life from the instant, her husband's ashes meet the waters till the time she (or her ashes) drown themselves.
It could stand for innumerous tears that are suppressed.
Or it could be something different altogether.
While, female oppression, is something I have already blogged on, in this movie, its much more potent. Unlike, Dor where, the widow did love her husband & missed him, Water speaks of girls, not even in their teens, widowed before they met their husbands, for whom they could have no possible affection. Also, while we feel sad for Meera, what happens to the playful Chuhiya, only about 7 yrs. old, is graphicaly brutal. The setting of the ashram, with the same grief multiplied in each inmate, is gripping. (That Chuhiya constantly reminded me of a niece, I absolutely adore, didn't make it any easier.)
But, I shall give my feminist rantings a rest.
A smaller but visible undercurrent, is the Gandhi effect. Gandhiji is still remembered largely, as a leader who catalysed Indian independence. With, independence being a 2 generation old thing, and Gandhiji's relevance in present day India, almost forgotten (except, for the rib-tickling
Lage Raho...Munnabhai), Water atleast reminds us, of the kind of impact Gandhiji made in a social context, then. With a miniscule screen time for the person himself, the director still manages to talk about Gandhi as a harbinger for change. All along, we are reminded, that a messiah will alleviate the pain, that we see the lead actors suffer.
One of the lines, that the character actually delivers is
For long, I thought that God is the ultimate truth. But now I know, Truth is the ultimate God.
While, one may routinely pass the above as another of Gandhi sayings, it is in the context of the movie, (with Holy Texts being used as tools for discrimination) that you realise the substance. The movie, with a central character searching for herself, as she is lost in the crowds milling for a look at Gandhi, is the most realistic picturisation of his mass popularity. Seema Biswas's acting in the closing minutes is amazing. Her confusion, desperation, will, yet uncertainty are beautifully potrayed.
Eventhough, the above themes, hurt me, for the discrimination was brutal, it never got personal. Thankfully, my family and I, have been fairly modern in their viewpoint. Widow oppression, is wholly detested. 1 UP! My both maternal grandparents, have been Gandhian in their thoughts and actions, for their whole life. My grandmother, continues to stick to his principles till today, and we have imbibed some of the easier ones from her. 2 UP!
But, what bothered me most, was the Brahminical angle to it. While, I am a non-practising Hindu and have at best vague ideas, as to what it means to be one, I have always been proud to be one. I prided my brahminical roots, for their intelligence and awareness. I dismissed anti-Brahminical movements as mere jealousy, that was mostly based on medivial happenings. This movie shook, some of them to the core.
Water, starts with a quote from Manusmriti, that screams of discrimination. The movie ends with stats, that refer to him. The movie is littered with things, he has setup! While, each refers to some distinction, a look beneath the surface, doesn't paint as bad a picture.
Lets take, a case in point. We learn, during the course of the movie, that Manu allows, a widow only 3 forms of life. A Sati (death in the pyre of her husband), or a life devoid of earthly pleasures, or (subject to consent of the family) a marriage to the younger brother of the dead husband. While it seemingly, subjects the widow to the mercy of others, it also ensures that she is not left uncared for. In a male-hounding society, it gave the widow a slight immunity against being subject to humiliation. So in principle, the laws of Manu, seem considerate, if not fair.
What has over the years, (and repeatedly so) gone wrong, is the interpretation of the laws. I never thought, that the learned men (read - Brahmins) would skew the
vedas to mean things diametrically opposite, of the original intentions. As one of them says, in the movie "It is a blessing for the widow, that she gets to sleep with a brahmin. A Brahmin can sleep with any woman." This is clearly, not what Manu had in mind, while setting down the basic rules that govern Hinduism.
Over centuries, such traditions would have amounted to the most blatant and widespread misuse of power, that ever has been.
And as per Hinduism, there is no action that ever goes unaccounted for. Each action has to be redeemed and its fruits (bitter or sweet) to be consumed. Hence, in light of such atrocities, the overwhelming anti-brahminical sentiments that are running amok all over the country start to appear just. Suddenly, I feel the collective guilt weighing me down and a black smear spread all across my ancestry. The current domestic situation, doesn't really allow me to talk about this to my parents :P and clearly, its not something that my extended family will take kindly to. But, as my senses open to an outside world, I realize that the quiet manner in which all brahmin bashing is endured, doesn't reflect a strength of character but rather an attempt to passively accept the conviction for ancestral deeds.
In an ever-shrinking world, where you require every possible support to make you stand up for what you are, and carve a niche for yourself, a fundamental constituent gone rotten, is very disturbing.
