I have never done a Movie analysis. So when my Professor gave us a movie to 'intellectualize', i was stumped. However, writing academic semi-intellectual bull after 5 years of Political Science comes naturally to me. A brief summary of my paper:
PLOT:
The Movie- Aakrosh begins with a powerful imagery of an old
Lawyer/Judge hesitating to touch the strong waves of the sea while a young
lawyer takes the plunge. It makes the viewer’s hope for an upcoming New Wave- a
new generation that would perhaps challenge the old, repetitive cycle of
oppression.
The Movie puts forward the protagonist, Lahanya Bhikhu
(played by Om Puri), an Adivasi who is accused of brutally assaulting and
murdering his wife, Nagi Bhikhu (played by Smita Patil). The silent and loud emotions of Lahanya in
different circumstances are shown without him saying a single word’ but
depicted through flashbacks or are visible through the stark emotions behind
his silent façade.
Bhaskar Kulkarni (played by Nassaruddin Shah) comes in as an advocate for
Lahanya’s defence. This case is crucial to him as it’s his first case as an
independent law practitioner and that too against his mentor, Dusane. Kulkarni
is shown as an ‘Idealist; - one who strong believes in the power of law to meat
out justice irrespective of ones place in society. He has strong ideas of conscience,
truth and justice.
Dusane, the public prosecutor in the case (played by Amresh Puri) is a
well-connected and well-known lawyer. He is shown to frequent the local
clubhouse where the power-elites come together to play cards- the Local M.L.A,
the forest contractor, civil surgeon, DSP etc. They talk about contemporary
issues of politics such as the growing Naxal problem in the area. It is hinted
that they are concerned about this specific case.
Bhaskar initially confronts Lahanya with his pre-conceived notions of tribal
nature and asks questions on the assumption that he is guilty of the crime.
However, frustrated with the enigmatic silence and the non-cooperation of
Lahanya in formulating his own defence strategy, he independently decides to
investigate the sequence of events of the day the crime took place. He visits
Lahanyas family that is survived by his ailing father, his sister and an
infant. However, the neighbours refuse to answer his questions and the ailing
father only shouts in an increasingly agitated voice , asking him to go away-
“Jao yahan se, Jao”. It is hinted that
the silence of the family and locality is coerced by the forest contractors and
his allies.
Bhaskar also meets a mysterious guy, adorned in a short kurta and a jhola. The
fellow claims that he is working among the tribals, to awaken them and bring
them together., When Bhaskar calls him a ‘social worker’ , he mocks the term as
elitist and fashionable given by the petty bourgeoisie.
Lahanyas feelings of horror and grief, in the course of the trial, is depicted
through his facial expressions. Bhaskar is also attacked many times in this
period for his association with the case. He comes to know that Lahanya is an
innocent in the crime who is paying for his resistance against the orders of
the Forest Contractor and as a result, his wife was raped and killed.
When Lahanyas father dies, he is allowed to perform the last rites where we are
shown the tormented and conflicted look on his face as he looks at his sister,
who is now alone in the world and perhaps more vulnerable to the predatory gaze
of the forest contractor and his allies. Perhaps realizing this, Lahanya
snatches an axe and chops off his sisters head. His animalistic scream of
anguish and ‘aakrosh’ stuns the viewer.
ANALYSIS:
- LAW
AND JUSTICE
The
movie successfully portrays the dis-junction between ‘law’ as written down in
the constitution;the ideals and values it symbolically upholds and the real
social position of advantage/disadvantage that people occupy in society that
makes their relationship with these state institutions relative. Rational Legal
procedures may not necessarily lead to a ‘free and fair’ trial and thus most
often, obscures justice. The court trial was a farce where the witness and medical
examiners testimonies, silence of the neighbours and other tribal workers were
either bought or coerced by the powerful and wealthy perpetrators. In a
Liberal-democratic state that upholds the values of a rationalistic
institutional framework, the ‘evidence’ has no holding power if it can so
easily be bought and manipulated by the nexus of power and wealth, of
privileged in society. Even Bhaskar who starts his career as an idealist of the
liberal system, questions the claims of law which leads to acquitting the real
culprits and devastation of the innocent.
-
CASTE
AND IDENTITY
I mainly focused on this aspect. Dusanes ambivalence towards the case despite his low-caste birth it disturbed me the most. The main point i put forward was:
Dusane,
in my view, can be seen as a ‘successful product’ of the Liberal Democratic
state where while he uses the appropriate language of ‘rights and liberty’ in
the court of Law and even in his personal talks, yet he fails to run away
from the constant shadow of his low-caste origin. It is a perfect example of the negative
result of upward mobility where the tribal man now holds his precarious
position of power with a sense of empowerment but is under pressure to
constantly prove his worth by more strenuously following the rules and values
of the Liberal state.(focus on 'ultra-rationalist' tendency)
While
those power-holders ultimately use social instead of secular authority against
Lahanya and the Tribal population, the crime has to be proved or defended
through legal and rational procedures.
HOPELESSNESS
AND DESPAIR – HUMILIATION
-The representation of two females as objects of lust and
domination is a hard hitting real imagery.
- When her husband Lahanya shows
resistance, the forest contractor and his allies teach him a lesson by raping
and finally killing his wife. Further his sister is shown as working for the
same contractor and vulnerable to his actions. Lahanya does not speak in the
course of the trial, perhaps out of fear of what may happen to his sister. The
film potently presents the silent pervasive conspiracy of the power elites who
prevent the vulnerable groups from raising their voice to gain any Justice. In
the end, Lahanya knows that his sister is alone in the World with no one to
protect her from the predatory gaze of the Contractor. He then raises his axe,
not to kill the perpetrators of his oppression, but to chop off his sisters
head. The stunning single act epitomises in one stroke the utter hopelessness
of his existence in a cruel oppressive system where only death can be
liberating. Nihalini presents that this hopelessness (reinforced by the
occasional ‘drunkenness’ of the tribe which is viewed as ‘lazy’ by outsiders) is
not out of weakness or complacency but a result of a resigned impotence towards
the incestuous union of Wealth, power and authority and simultaneous silencing
and systematic intimidation if the under-privileged groups. Ultimately, it is
this dehumanisation and the resultant humiliation that propels Lahanyas act- a
desperate act borne not out of misplaced anger or revenge but a tragic sense of
merciful liberation from what he realises as an unending cycle of corruption
and oppression. Here violence perpetrates violence not to seek revenge but as a
last resort to avoid humiliation.
VALUE OF LIFE
An Ironic image in the movie disturbed me the most: in a scene where Bhaskar is
reading about the killing of a Tribal women in the Newspaper, the Radio news in
the background says that Vinoba Bhave is going to protest against cow
slaughter. The scene was a beauty of subtlety : where the harsh truth that the
value of a tribal women’s life does not guarantee any shock or protest while
any religious issue becomes important enough to propel the leaders and people
to action.
So, I have put forward some of the themes through which i have analysed the film.The other themes included sexuality, alternative space/Marxism etc. I think, as my first attempt to 'semi-intellectualize' a film, it was a good effort. Of course, my grades are still not out, so still no clue as to how 'deep' my analysis is. But it was surprisingly a good practice of what i was talking about in my earlier post- a practice in originality. Well, as much as i could, i suppose. There are a few citations, but i haven't put them here in my post.
I just may do another movie this summer.