Documentary Film On Mahatma Gandhi example essay topic

... Mahatma Gandhi was a multi-faceted man, one whose writings spanned every subject under the sun, including: agriculture, education, science, sanitation, economics, literature, industry, women, children, health, family planning, religion, and, of course, politics. Many were surprised to learn of his prolific writing, and were astounded to hear that he had probably written more than anyone else in history (his collected works run to over 100 volumes, several hundred pages each). Mahatma Gandhi was born during an era of progressive evolution of communication technology. Unfortunately, he was born in a country, which was under the clutches of foreign rule. Mahatma Gandhi, was a passionate opponent of modernity and technology, preferring the pencil to the typewriter, the loincloth to the business suit, the plowed field to the belching manufactory, printed words to moving pictures.

Moving pictures made its appearance in India at the beginning of the twentieth century, when the country was poised for major social and political changes. A society that had remained unchanged for centuries was being transformed in the face of technological innovations. Cars, airplanes, radio broadcasts and photograph records had recently been introduced, bringing with them new status symbols as well as access to foreign ideas. At the same time, the press had become a new force in the formation of public opinion as regional language newspapers, including those in Hindi, were being published around the country. It was against this background that cinema arrived. In the decades that followed it was to assume the dimensions of a major socio-cultural force.

Mahatma Gandhi expressed his disapproving ideas on cinema in 1927 when the Indian Cinematograph Committee sent him to him a request accompanied with a questionnaire, on what were his views on cinema. Gandhiji returned the questionnaire with an unfavourable comment in a letter address to T. Rangachriar, Chairman of the Committee, stating he had views to offer as he negated cinema as 'sinful technology'. The letter dated November 12, 1927 said:' Even if was so minded, I should be unfit t o answer your questionnaire as I have never been a cinema. But even to outsiders that it has done and is doing is patent. The good if it has done at all, remains to be proved. ' He even refused to send a message to a souvenir, which was to be published on the occasion of silver jubilee celebration of Indian cinema in 1938.

Mahatma's secretary curtly replied 'As a rule Gandhi gives messages only on rare occasions and this is only for a cause whose virtue is ever un doubtful. As for cinema industry, he has the least interest in it and one may not expect a word of appreciation from him. ' Gandhi's dislike for cinema appeared a few times in Harijan, a paper edited by him. Gandhi said in an interview published in May 3, 1942 issue of the paper.

'If I began to organise picketing in respect of them (the evil of cinema), I should lose my caste, my mahatma ship... I may say that cinema films are often bad. About the radio I do not know. ' Mahatma Gandhi's persistent aversion to this innovative tool of western technology created a virtual disappointment in the film circle in India. Even Khwaja Ahmed Abbas, the noted film personality wrote a long letter to Gandhi pleading him to reconsider his views on cinema. One interesting portion of his letter is, I think, worth mentioning here: ' Today I bring for your scrutiny - and approval - a new toy my generation has learned to play with, the CINEMA!

- You include cinema among evils like gambling,'s atta, horseracing etc... Now if these statements had come from any other person, it was not necessary to be worried about them... But your case is different. In view of the great position you hold in this country, and I may say in the world, even the slightest expression of your opinion carries much weight with millions of people. And one of the world's most useful inventions would be allowed to be discarded or what is worse left alone to be abused by unscrupulous people. You are a great soul, B apu.

In your heart there is no room for prejudice. Give this little toy of ours, the cinema, which is not so useless as it looks, a little of your attention and bless it with a smile of toleration. ' 'Babu rao Patel, editor of Film india (one of the early film journals in India) mounted a more direct attack on Gandhi in 1940. I quote:' Let this Champion of the Dari dra Narayan (poor men) come down and meet and we shall try to convince him, or to be convinced (by him).

Surely as workers in the film field, we are not worse than the poor untouchables for whom the old Mahatma's heart bleeds so often. And if he thinks we are, the more reason why he should come to our rescue. Even all of his junior colleagues in the Indian National Congress were not so volatile critics of cinema. It is interesting to note that no congress leader, except Raja ji (Chakra pani. Rajagopalacharia) had rigid and hostile attitude towards the cinematic arts or any other performing arts. Therefore it was obvious Indian National Congress did not have consistent and constructive policies towards the development of cinematic and performing arts, which could be used effectively during the India's struggle for freedom.

Instead of doing that the leadership in Indian National Congress allowed this potent medium of mass awareness to refuge it into hands of private producers whose sole aim was to make money. It is worth noting here that the first Indian statesman to have the flicker of the projector catch his eye was none other than Rabindranath Tagore. Tagore also tried writing the scenario of his own play, Tap ati, to be directed by Dairen Ganguly, but that project was stillborn. Rabin dra Nath understood the magic power of cinema. He was first Indian statesman who was invited by UFA (a primer German Film Company) in 1933 to direct an English film with all European casts and crew on his own original screenplay entitled The Child.

The film could not see the light of the day, because Tagore did not support the rise of Nazism in Germany. Though the national leadership of Congress did not hold much briefing for using power of cinematic art in their struggle against the foreign rule. Yet the British India administration established Censor Broad as early as in 1920. The Broad was primarily established to keep a check on anti -British sentiment in the films produced in the country.

Even as some Indian filmmakers touched upon Gandhian ideas in their films, the British government realized the force of cinema and how it was being used for political propaganda. The British government, in an attempt to prevent the depiction of these ideas in films, tightened film censorship. The censorship machinery was particularly sensitive to issues such as the Indian princes, labor, communist ideas, the Gandhi program and Hindu-Muslim relations. As a consequence, the filmmaker confined himself to predominantly non-controversial entertainment. This was the origin of the tradition of escapist cinema in India.

Uday kal (The Dawn) was a film directed by V. Shant aram, which was originally titled as Swaraj ya To ran (the flag of freedom), and the film was about Shivaji's (The Maratha King) fight against the Mughal rulers. These facts drew censorship - the title had to be changed and the story was frowned upon. Mahatma Gandhi call for Civil Disobedience, the D andi March against the Salt Law formed the political background of the period and the colonial government saw in the film an endorsement of the Mahatma's actions. Interestingly to note, by and large Hindi films produced in India did not reflect any positive attitude of confrontation against the foreign domination in India.

Because very foundation of early Indian film industry was directly structured on the borrowed ideal from Hollywood films... Political expression in films first appeared with themes of social reforms to which Gandhi had given a prominence in national politics because issues such as eradication of untouchability and emancipation of women formed part of the Gandhian programmes. While most of the early films were mythological, the first film on a contemporary theme was made in 1936, titled ' Ach hut Kannya' (The Untouchable bride). This set the tone for temperance propaganda in films, which was to assume the proportions of an obsession in later years.

In fact, in all the social reform films, there was an obligatory Dalit theme, which was an important part of Gandhi's programs of social uplift. Maboob Khan's Aurat (The woman) made in 1940-based Gandhian perspective of real womanhood in India. Aurat became so popular. Maboob Khan had to rehash Aurat into Mother India in 1956. Mother India found an unqualified support from the then ruling elite in India.

AK Chattier (1911-1983) a China-based journalist was interested in photography and trained for one year in Tokyo in 1935-36 and also in the New York Institute of Photography. He decided to make a documentary film on Mahatma Gandhi, whose passionate humanism made a deep impact on him. Chattier recorded that the idea occurred to him on Gandhi's birthday, while on a ship from New York to Dublin, from photography to filmmaking was but a step for him. Back in China, he promptly founded a company called Documentary Films Limited and set about realising his dream. He decided to collect the already existing actuality material of Gandhi from various sources - archives, news agencies, studios and individuals - then shoot contemporary scenes and string these precious visual records together. First, he searched Indian studios and then traveled abroad, to places where Gandhiji had been, to unearth previous footage's.

In Chennai, he was able to salvage precious footage of 1927 Congress. It showed Srinivas a Ayyangar leading Gandhiji to the dais, followed by Sarojini Naidu and Nehru. Jit en Banner ji, later to make his mark as a cinematographer in Tamil cinema for Calcutta-based Arorora Films, had shot the footage. In Mumbai Chettiar got a clip of film, shot by Dada Sahib Phalle, of Tilak's funeral. By the time the film was ready for release, political leadership was grossly divided on the communal lines and the British Government had tightened censorship. Yet Mahatma Gandhi, was released without any hassle.

The print and the negative of the film is lost. During the year of Gandhi centenary a five hour long documentary was officially made by Films Division. It was a mare assemble of newsreel footage, but having no layer of cinematic creativity in presenting the theme. After India achieved its political independence, too many film were made on the patriotic themes Some of them even became popular like Shahid (The Martyrdom) and Azad Hind Faux (Indian National Army). The themes of these films were not obviously inspired from Gandhian ideology. Most of them were made from anti -Gandhian point of view.

First idea for a biographical film on the life of Mahatma Gandhi was floated in June 1953, five years after his death. But even the Congress Government headed by his most trusted lieutenant, Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru did not find it commercially viable to give a financial backing. Nehru told the Rajya Sabha, the Upper House of Indian Parliament, in December 1963 that 'the production of a film on the life of Gandhiji was too difficult a proposition a Government department to take up. The Government was not fit to do this and they had not got competent people to it. 'This was an unfortunate confession and it reflected also dilemma of the Congress leadership to take a position regarding Mahatma. British film maker Mark Robson made a very dramatic film called Nine Hours to Rama, which was released in 1963 all over the West, but was not allowed to be exhibited in India.

The films was an intense dramatic and fictional recreation of the nine hours spent by assassin Natural Gods e before his murder of Mahatma Gandhi. Malcolm Arnold's superb musical score adds to the film's mounting tension. More recently Kamal Hassan, the versatile cine -artiste of South India, made a similar kind of film Hey! Ram, which had more twists and turns to suit the box office demands in India. But Hey! Ram did not do well at the box office.

Yet another film Five to Five by directed not so well known P Kumar Vasu dev, which was telecast through Door darshan (State owned Television channel) It tried to depict the complexities built around the character of Mahatma's assassin. This film received favourable reviews in India. This is an interesting fact that film makers generally find the immediate circumstance, which led to Gandhiji's assassination, is attractive subject matter for making film. Only two real feature films were made on the life of Mahatma Gandhi, first one is Gandhi made on a grand scale. It was directed by Richard Attenborough He had been thinking of a Gandhi film since 1965.

He was asked revised the script several times over the next fifteen years. He was finally able to launch as the multilateral co-production in 1980 Gandhi was widely released through out the world. Even it created a history by winning second largest numbers of Oscars. Though Gandhi was not generally received with open heart in political circle in India. Salman Rushdie, Indian born British writer makes an interesting observation on Gandhi 'Here was Gandhi-as-guru, purveying that fashionable product, the Wisdom of the East; and Gandhi-as-Christ, dying (and, before that, frequently going on hunger strike) so that others might live. His philosophy of nonviolence seemed to work by embarrassing the British into leaving; freedom could be won, the film appeared to suggest, by being more moral than your oppressor, whose moral code could then oblige him to withdraw.

'. Yet the international success of Gandhi stimulated many in India to take up venture of making biographical films on the life of political leaders. Sardar (on the life of Ballad Bhai Petal, the iron man of India directed by Kat an Mehta and Bhimrao Ambedkar by Jabber Peter can be cited here as two apt examples. Both of these films were not seen by many. In free India, there is being immense connection and interaction between political parties and film personalities. The politicians and cine-artistes can interchange their role very often and very easily.

But Most of film makers do not have courage to do films on political themes. Other film on Gandhiji's early life in South Africa Making of the Mahatma directed by Shyam Benegal was made as a co -production between India and South Africa The Making of the Mahatma' is simple reflection on the life and times Of Gandhiji in South Africa... The film is based on a book The Apprenticeship of the Mahatma by Dr. Fatima Meer, a well Known South African sociologist and writer. The Mahatma is about Gandhi, the westernized barrister and the vulnerable average man / husband.

For the most part it revolves around Gandhi's experiences in South Africa that transform him from Mohandas Karam chand Gandhi, the coolie lawyer to Mahatma Gandhi who could empathize with the plight of colonized people as being the same where ever they had been subjected to 'White' oppression. Benegal made this movie after two and half years of work on the script and 12 drafts later. Scripted along with Dr. Fatima Meer and Sham a Zaid i, Making of The Mahatma has excelled in its shows in many countries abroad, but never commercially released in India. Except these two major films, there has not been much work on done on any aspect of Gandhi's life. Indian filmmakers have not tried enough to directly deal with the Gandhian ideology in the film. Filmmakers are generally called dream merchants.

They sell dreams to their audience But as far as making a film on Gandhi's passionate preoccupation of non violence is concerned. The very few filmmakers have come forwards There is, perhaps it seems, no frequent buyers. The political and social upheaval that have been taking since India's independence have destroyed the very basic of composite Gandhian root (if any) in Indian society.