A short journal entry on post-independence Indian films

For this piece I will be talking about post-independence Indian films. This will include the central ideas the films tried depicting and the questions they tried answering, along with examples from two films: Do Bhiga Zameen and Pather Panchali. 

In the post-independence era, there were two major questions that we keep circling back to - 'Who are we?' and 'Where are our roots?'. In the first few years, there was no celebration of independence as such due to the tense and painful partition that the people had just endured. Furthermore, the suspicions on both ends of that of the government that was yet to be formed and the filmmakers added to the lack of India as a newly independent state being depicted. It was only in the 1950s that a patriotic and nationalist approach came into play. An important factor for this is the politics of the time. Within a country that is so vast and varied and full of differences, the government wanted to create a united image for India. The tense situation with parties that still were on the fence about whether they should join India or not would only get aggravated if this nationalist portrayal of a united India excluded any community. Films, unless they were a medium to promote a nationalist India, did not help the political leaders; thus, there was suspicion towards them.

A clear example of this would be, based on Ashish Rajadhyaksha's work, how the Indian state could not control the growth or popularity of film, which is why they kept the state media 'uncontaminated' by keeping the 'vulgarising film music' out. They only changed this policy when Radio Ceylon started playing Hindi Film Music, which the Indian public could not receive easily. Thus, Vividh Bharathi was launched. 

Moving towards Do Bhiga Zameen, the film directed by Bimal Roy, is one of the most iconic films of that time. The film is known for its powerful social commentary and neorealistic style. It is inspired by Italian neorealism and Vittorio de Sica's Bicycle Thieves in particular. It explores rural poverty and the urban struggle post-independence. The story revolves around Shambhu, a farmer who moves to the city to earn enough to pay off his debt and keep his land, which is at risk of being seized by the moneylender. 

The film gives one an insight into the struggles of poor rural communities that lose their livelihood, amongst other things, due to modernisation and industrialisation. The authority figure, in this case, the zamindar, does not care about the people but the profit he will make. The development is simply a namesake. It emphasises the idea that the Indian society is an agrarian one and how the people who keep it alive are struggling the most with the emergence of new technologies. 

In addition to this, it subtly reinforces 'Indian values' through its characters and their morals, or lack thereof in some cases and actions throughout. The child, Kanhaiya, steals despite his moral dilemma due to his circumstances, but when he gets an unpleasant reaction from his father for doing so, it reinforces the idea of theft being 'bad'. When he steals again, he prays and apologises to God, which I would relate to the concept of karma and the 'God watches everything' concept that most Indian children hear growing up, and the film utilises this in the form of closure, which is why we understand exactly what the child is thinking. 

The 'bad' characters are shown smoking or talking in a way that is very different from our protagonist's family or the 'good' people, which brings me back to Ashish Rajadhyaksha's work, where he quotes Gandhi. According to Gandhi, modernity is a 'raging fire', surrounded by 'the cinema, the stage, the race course, the drinking booth and the opium den—all these enemies of society that have sprung up under the fostering influence of the present system threaten us on all sides'. These are the traits that all the 'negative characters' had in the film which is particularly interesting to me. I would also like to connect this to Naya Daur, which looks at modernity from the perspective of people who will lose their jobs with such 'development'. Modernity is a double-edged sword where the people who should ideally benefit from better working conditions and less life-threatening jobs are the ones who face the brunt of it by losing what little means of earning they have. The development we chase after in the name of improving lives is what ends up making their lives worse by taking away their present livelihoods. This is what I find common in films based in rural areas from this time; they predict a villain from the future, which does end up being true eventually. Do Bhiga Zameen has a villain from the past, which is the Zamindari system, and one from the future, which is the machine and the struggle of development that does not empower the people who need it the most.

Comparing Do Bhiga Zameen and Bicycle Thieves, we notice how society stops the characters in both films in entirely different ways. In Bicycle Thieves, the society physically stops the protagonist with its laws and the authorities that protect said laws. Meanwhile, Do Bhiga Zameen tries to present an ideal Indian who is morally right and has a strong conscience that does not let them do something like steal. The child thinks his mother is dead because he stole and tears the stolen money in an attempt to bring his mother back because he's guilty. This conscience is again a societal construct that highlights the juxtaposition of societal power and control in the two films. 

I would also say that this adds to the idea of the kind of people and the common moral conscience a nation should have, the kind of nation we want to build and be a part of. Films are extremely influential and can change perceptions through a powerful narrative and subtle implications that make us subconsciously understand and further even alter or create our worldview through certain traits and characteristics that have positive or negative connotations. Be it the use of intoxicants by the morally grey characters or the innocence and naivety of the 'good', 'simpleminded' characters. 

Coming back to the two questions mentioned in the beginning, our roots are linked to our land, and India's land is deeply connected to the rural community and agriculture, which explains the emphasis on the 'jai jawan jai kisan' motive films from the 1950s. The glorious land is used in various songs from films where someone comes from the outside and views and eventually loves the agrarian society and the lifestyle. I think the outsider character is a means to explain the different lifestyle to an audience that is disconnected from it, be it in Do Bhiga Zameen, where Shambhu moves to an urban setting, or Veer Zaara, where Veer brings Zaara to his village and introduces her to the rural life. This gives the filmmaker an opportunity to present the lifestyle and the region in any way they want to portray it to an audience far from it. 

Finally, I would say I am deeply impressed and in awe of how detailed the usage of political ideologies and characters are in these films, Do Bhiga Zameen in particular, while also being visually stunning with a gripping narrative. Each character was well thought out, from their traits and attitude to their dialogues, which enhanced the narrative and viewing experience for me.