Tracing Adoor Gopalakrishnan's life in cinema | Culture | Times Crest
Popular on Times Crest
  • In This Section
  • Entire Website
  • Specialise to succeed
    June 29, 2013
    Despite its sudden closure in 2006, Lotus Books lives on in dog-eared snippets of memory among a certain section of Mumbai readers.
  • Copy left and right?
    June 29, 2013
    Can the culture of copyright also be creatively crippling?
  • The great Khan of books
    June 29, 2013
    Founded by Balraj Bahri Malhotra in 1953, Bahrisons is a proud sentinel at the gateway of Delhi's Khan Market
More in this Section
Leaving tiger watching to raise rice Ecologist Debal Deb, who did his post-doctoral research from IISc in…
The crorepati writer He's the man who gives Big B his lines. RD Tailang, the writer of KBC.
Chennai-Toronto express Review Raja is a Canadian enthusiast whose quirky video reviews of Tamil…
Don't parrot, perform Maestro Buddhadev Dasgupta will hold a masterclass on ragas.
A man's man Shivananda Khan spent his life speaking up for men who have sex with men.
Bhowmick and the first family of Indian football At first glance, it would be the craziest set-up in professional football.
From Times Blogs
The end of Detroit
Jobs in Detroit's car factories are moving to India.
Chidanand Rajghatta
How I love the word ‘dobaara’...
Can ‘bindaas’ or ‘jhakaas’ survive transliteration?
Shobhaa De
Anand marte nahin...
India's first superstar died almost a lonely life.
Robin Roy

Tracing Adoor Gopalakrishnan's life in cinema


Adoor Gopalakrishnan: A Life in Cinema By Gautaman Bhaskaran Penguin 218 pages, Rs 599

Gautaman Bhaskaran, the authorised biographer of Adoor Gopalakrishnan, is in awe of his subject and lets him direct the book. The result is an uneven book that fails to do justice to one of India's finest-ever filmmakers. The access he seems to have had to the master director doesn't translate into insights about the man or his work. The fawning prose doesn't help either.

In his foreword, Adoor says Bhaskaran mostly depended on interviews with him for the book. He appreciates the fact that the author has done well in not trying to be analytical about the films. Well, many readers may not mind some analysis. They might have even wanted the author to place Adoor's commentary on his life and works in its socio-cultural context.

The first few chapters of the book introduce us to Adoor's childhood and family. The Nair joint family he grew up in is sketched in detail. The cultural ambience is provided by a crumbling feudal order. Expectedly, Kathakali is an influence and there is a lot of indulgent talk about this classical theatre's influence on his art. But, how did this art form shape Adoor, the filmmaker? In many ways, Kathakali, which revels in exaggeration, is a total contrast to Adoor's minimalist cinema. Anti-heroes are the lifeblood of Kathakali plays: In the deep recesses of their souls lies the truth of Kathakali. This is a far contrast to Adoor's world where anti-heroes just don't exist and heroes hardly engage in any heroic acts. Adoor's continued fascination for Kathakali is evident in the documentaries he has made of some of the finest actors of our time - Chenganoor Raman Pillai, Kalamandalam Ramankutty Nair and Kalamandalam Gopi.

Similarly, Bhaskaran tries to trace a Gandhian in Adoor. His decision to study in Gandhigram Rural Institute, an innovative experiment to link the Gandhian vision of constructive programme and Nai Taleem by G Ramachandran, could perhaps be identified as a clue. As evidence of Adoor's belief in non-violence, Bhaskaran writes that the director refused to kill a civet that had urinated on his books and documents. Violence, perhaps, is not much of a theme for Adoor, even in films like Elippathayam and Vidheyan which are studies in power relations within the family and the society.

The chapter on music in Adoor's films has interesting observations. Adoor credits Ritwik Ghatak, his teacher at the FTII, for introducing him to the creative possibilities of sound. But he adds that the teacher failed to recognise the student when Adoor met Ghatak some years after he passed out of the institute. The reflections on animals and birds that complete the cast of Adoor's films too indicate the possibilities that the master director offers a biographer.

They remain only possibilities because the biographer seems oblivious of the sociocultural ferment that helped Adoor make his kind of films. We would have liked to know why the film society movement flourished in Kerala or how a film cooperative could produce films with a new sensibility? This is important for Adoor's work as the movement spawned a new generation of filmmakers, and film watchers, who were concerned more about the aesthetics of cinema than commerce. Similarly, why was a film like Mukhamukham seen as a virulently anti-Left film in Kerala whereas, elsewhere, many critics saw it as a sympathetic reading of the Left movement? Adoor's cinema is a reflection of the modernist tradition that influenced Kerala's cultural and political preferences in the second half of the 20th century. His universality is born out of its local roots. Bhaskaran sees the foliage but is clueless about the roots.

Other Times Group news sites
The Times of India | The Economic Times
इकनॉमिक टाइम्स | ઈકોનોમિક ટાઈમ્સ
Mumbai Mirror | Times Now
Indiatimes | नवभारत टाइम्स
महाराष्ट्र टाइम्स
Living and entertainment
Timescity | iDiva | Bollywood | Zoom
| Technoholik |


itimes | Dating & Chat | Email
Hot on the Web
Book print ads | Online shopping | Business solutions | Book domains | Web hosting
Business email | Free SMS | Free email | Website design | CRM | Tenders | Remit
Cheap air tickets | Matrimonial | Ringtones | Astrology | Jobs | Property | Buy car
Online Deals
About us | Advertise with us | Terms of Use and Grievance Redressal Policy | Privacy policy | Feedback
Copyright© 2010 Bennett, Coleman & Co. Ltd. All rights reserved. For reprint rights: Times Syndication Service