AAKROSH: THE CRY OF THE WOUNDED (1980)

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.