A paradox trans-created, A man discovered : Anand Gandhi on Ship Of Theseus, life and more ....
Whatever distance the
evolutionary character of a thought-process has covered till date, if a film doesn't enhance that by one more step, the being of that (film), thus, is
irrelevant to me:
Anand Gandhi.
Q & A.Anand Gandhi, film director (Ship of Theseus).
Who’s Anand Gandhi?
If
you would like to meet an interesting side of this filmmaker, go watch
Doppelganger. Sheer astonishment awaits you!
He
was born in 1980 which makes him all of 32. He has been a playwright for the
Marathi theatre-scene. He started writing for the television post-2000. He was
a part of the team that wrote the dialogues of “Kyunki...” and screenplay of
“Kahaani...” He made his debut venture “Right Here, Right Now” (1, 2) in 2003.
3 years later, Anand followed it up with a 5-part movie called “Continuum”
(Hunger, Trade and Love, Death, Enlightenment, Continuum).
He is finally here with “Ship Of Theseus”. That film which went to all the
prestigious film-festivals and amazed the audience throughout. The famed
director of “Dhobi Ghat”, Kiran Rao and UTV Motion pictures, in association
with Anand’s organization, Recyclewala Films, have decided to give the film a
mainstream release. The film releases on 19th July at Mumbai, Delhi, Pune,
Kolkata and Bengaluru. The problems associated with Indiependent films have
been carefully addressed through the release of “Ship of Theseus”. The film is
asking viewers-patrons from other cities to vote if they would like SOT to get
released in their respective cities. Cities with maximum votes would have the
honor of hosting SOT-show(s).
The
film is made of 3 stories and hoards of questions. The film, teaming up with
its visuals, enters into the zone of collective righteousness, intelligence,
accuracy, scientific and human cognizance of the audience. India has produced
films of many forms and shape; SOT differs in a manner where the discussions
which have been confined within the living-rooms of the academic intellectuals,
have now come out in the open. These debates and opinions are now a part of our
collective thought-process. This interview talks about how SOT got made, and
its writer Anand Gandhi. However, this piece talks about the maker Anand Gandhi
too, what runs within his sub-conscious levels, how much layered he is, how he
perceives the world around (him) and what can we expect from him in (the) coming
days.
And add the word “More” to
that. Presenting:
So what is keeping you up
these days?
The
editing and other post-production jobs of my 2nd film “Tumbad”. While I have
produced the film, Rahi Varwe has worn the director’s hat this time. Sohum
Shah, who happens to be the actor-producer in all of my films, has collaborated
with my production company, Recyclewala Films, with an intention to present
this film.
When can we expect
“Tumbad” at our nearest screens?
Hopefully,
around September.
Which are the festivals
“SOT” has been to?
Toronto,
London, Tokyo, Brisbane, Mumbai, Dubai, Rotterdam, Berlin... there are many more...
and we have been awarded more or less at all the outings.
What is this film all
about?
Ship
of Theseus is a tale of 3 narratives. I tried to play with the synonyms. Is it
technically wrong? The title of the film is a thought experiment in itself. The
whole paradox explores an idea where the ship built by Theseus gets replaced
element-by-element after a certain point of time. The question thus arises as
to does it remain the same ship that Theseus had built? If each of its elements
has been changed, does it cease to be the original ship? If yes, what is the
threshold from where the change starts? When does the ship cease to be the old
ship and start becoming the new one? From a vantage point, when you apply the
same paradox on humans, we come to see that humans undergo a complete change
within a span of 7 years. Each cell gets replaced by a new one. And this change
is not a physical one only; it is a material and psychological change too.
Thus, the question of whether you are the same person or not do arise. The
central question that spirals out of the film thus revolves around identities
and changes. Who are you? What lies within a constant process of change? What
is the relation between you and the universe around you? The entire crux of all
these questions has been answered through these 3 stories. The first story is
of a blind photographer. She is an Egyptian who stays in Mumbai. She is a
genius. She explores her world through her camera and captures poignant
moments. We try to understand how she fits into this ecosystem in a seamless
pattern. The second story is that of an ascetic monk. He is more of an erudite
man than only a monk. He is a really(truly) educated person, one of a true
academic nature. He has dedicated his entire life fighting for animal rights.
Now he is sick and needs to be on medication which has been tested on animals.
So, he suffers from a paradox where the intake of these medicines means his
entire life’s worth of protests would be futile. Thus, he refuses to take the
medicines and slowly prepares himself for the final call. And as he nears his
death, all those standpoints start becoming question marks all over again. The
third story is that of a stockbroker. He lives within a shell of his own,
limited and confined. However, he shares a frank and cordial relation with his
grandmother. His grandmother’s universe, on the contrary, is vast. She
desperately wants her grandson to open his windows and embrace Knowledge. We,
at this, juncture, come to notice that this stockbroker has had a kidney
transplant at some point in his life. So, one day, while he is at the hospital,
attending to his ailing grandmother, he comes across a person whose kidney has
been stolen. The broker suddenly starts asking himself what if he has received
a stolen kidney. To this question, his nearest circle of doctors and NGOs
reassure him that his kidney is that of a dead man. He, from here on, embarks on a mission to find out who has received
this stolen kidney. He, along with one of his friends, starts their probe from
one of the local police stations. They seem to find the recipient of that
stolen kidney. They reach Stockholm, Sweden in pursuit of that kidney. They
come face-to-face with the recipient at Stockholm. This face-to-face is the
crux of the entire 3rd story. And all these 3 stories meet at a
crossroad somewhere down the line. And that is when all the individual
questions team up to form a larger, more relevant question.
The narration sounds like
how the stories meet each other in Mani Ratnam’s “Yuva”. Even Vasan Bala’s
“Peddlers” have such an individualistic premise when the characters portray
their inner conflicts and come to a face-off. Nishikanth Kamat’s “Mumbai Meri
Jaan” had a similar premise. So, how does this multi-story format work out with
the audience? Yes, we do admit that there’s an interest-generating formula
associated with his story-telling format. But, how does this format attract us
as an audience and you as the story-teller?
I
think if you are going to explain, explore and understand a particular story,
you need to study it from all the sides possible. If you carefully observe the
oriental tradition, western tradition of story-telling, we would conclude that
they have a non-linear multi-narrative structure. If asked from where does Mahabharata
take off, neither you nor I would be in a position to answer back confidently.
The reason for the same would be the fact that as soon as I would explain that
the story starts from a certain king Bharata, you would contradict saying this
is a story of Surya, the sun god and his son. I would then contest you and say
that Mahabharata actually starts off from some sages who have been discussing
about Ved Vyas. And then you would interrupt and say that there is a preface to
this too. And that would put an end to the discussion. The bottom line is in
order to have a holistic view; you need to have multiple perspectives about the
subject. So in order to understand something or somebody, we analyze from
several different angles. And while analyzing, we come closer to the subject
through a process. It’s like a story of those seven Blinds and the elephant.
It’s as if we are each one of those seven blinds, trying to get a perception
about the elephant. If we touch the ears of the elephant and conclude that it’s
a winged animal, or touch the legs of the elephant and conclude that it has a
cylindrical shape, or if we touch the tail of the elephant and conclude that
it’s a snake-like being, then the whole truth will never come out. And if I add
up all the truth in their mini-versions, then I think we will be able to
comment on the elephant in a far better way. Thus, if that elephant is the
absolute truth, a multiple-narrative story format helps us in getting to that
truth.
How did this philosophy of
Theseus come into the picture? Was it always there? Or is it like when you
finished the film, you realized that this title is going perfectly with the
content? Or was it midway when you were done with the skeleton of the film?
For
me, the philosophical paradigm forms the base of a film. Always. The question
which has been raised through the philosophy forms the crux of my films. My
films revolve and evolve around the philosophy; not the other way round. I keep
questioning myself as to what will be the right metaphor, the right story, the
right way through which this particular philosophy can be purposefully served.
Thus, in case of SOT, the title came at the very outset; the rest followed it.
There is a very
frightening picture we get to see nowadays. Big studios keep producing films on
Theseus, Zeus or Poseidon. However, they do not substantiate on their
philosophies. Case in hand, Tarsem Singh’s “Immortals”. On the other hand, your
film, on a shoe-string budget, possesses so many questions that it almost
starts haunting us. What do you think is the reason behind such a disparity?
Let’s
get to the bottom of this. The bigger you invest in a film, the greater your
fears are. The bigger the budget gets, the larger the players are. Sharks come
into the big picture. People who have no visible relation with the art, gets
attached to the project. I was invited once to a forum. Komal Nahata was the
moderator. Prakash Jha and Sudhir Mishra were there too. And the discussion was
something similar to this question you just asked. And they asked me why this
thing happens. So, I asked them, how many from the audience, would keep their
mothers ahead of their local McDonald’s? Almost all raised their hands. And
then I pointed out the huge sales-figures of McD food. And I made a point of manufactured
consent. The collective consent that you see today has been manufactured over a
particular time-frame. There is no pressing fact or data behind this truth. It
has been manufactured so that we can sell inane values and insane products. It
will help you sell stale popcorns, oily fries, fairness creams, sugar-coated
cheese et al. It will be easy to sell things which are bad for the social,
judgmental, and spiritual health of a being. That is why you can easily sell a
million-dollar film. They can only sell popcorn; selling a healthy fruit-juice
is not their cup of tea. And that is where they fail to achieve verisimilitude.
And then, there’s us, people who have made it an abstinent resolve to go for
the truth. We have nothing to lose and thus, never worry about the journey. If
Buddha was alive today, he would have went on and made a film. To me, film is
an extremely potent tool in search for the truth. Film as a medium has the
power to reflect ourselves and our universe. It is such a powerful medium that
it consists within itself music, literature and a fine sense of judgment,
color, science, spirituality and many more elements that are essential to life.
Whatever distance the evolutionary character of a thought-process has covered
from the last 3-4000 years till date, if a film doesn't enhance that by one
more step, and then the being of that (film) is irrelevant to me. Being a
filmmaker, my primary objective is to accumulate all the teachings of people
like Buddha, Darwin, Einstein, Dawkins and take them one step more closer to
the truth.
Being a filmmaker of a
different fabric, one always gets to face a dilemma of a different sort. The
contemporary filmmakers that we get to see around us have all started on a
different plane. And as they go on becoming successful and settled, their lifestyle
changes, their look changes, their spec changes. In short, whatever they have
tried to tell while they were raw and new, boiled down to the same old,
hackneyed cock-and-bull story at the end of the day!
Yes!
Kind of true.
How long will you fight
against this truth that this is such an industry where money rules! Whenever
you will start thinking of making a philosophy-based epic, the same sharks you
were earlier talking about, will come into the picture. Is there any plan or
strategy of not toeing the conventional line of action?
You
are absolutely right. Point blank! I have visited and revisited such
checkpoints for n number of times in my life. I had started my career as a
writer when I was 19. My aim has always to reach out towards the greater objective
I have in my life. And this is also true, that through all the resistance and
penury I went through, it has made me even more resolute. It has helped me to
stand by my decisions. The crisis that was there 7 years back, is out of sight
now. People have seen and appreciated my work. They have realized that I can do
justice if given a certain amount of money. I used to write for TV soaps at
that age. And then, it struck me that I am not doing the right thing. I am
hurting my collective intelligence. There is already an existing question on
our collective intelligence. There is no public discourse, no debate, and no
exchange of dialogues between us. So, somewhere down the line, I felt I am not
doing anything constructive or conducive. So I left what I was doing. I did
that while I was 19. I never went back to it afterwards. And then there were
friends who were doing commercials and similar stuffs. I have always had a strong
reservation against the idea, and I was sad about the whole scenario too. I was
standing by my decisions so I couldn't join them. And I am not being
vainglorious about the stand. It was just a necessity for me at that time.
And
then I placed bait on the 10 years I had in front of me. On one side, I thought
of all the things I could do. I could explore better places, invent better
things, meet better people, be a better performer, be a better human being and
end of the day learn to live better. On the other side, I could continue doing
what my friends were doing and accumulate a decent amount of money. So, I tried
to figure out how much money would I make in next ten years. Random figures
like 7 crore, 10 crore started surfacing. And then I thought that even 50 crore
would be nothing against all the experiences I would gather in all these 10
years. Thus, I take it as my advantage and good luck that I have been able to
take such a decision. I can’t comment on others who have not walked my path
because some of them are my friends. It’s not easy for all to take such a path.
However, for me, it has been an enlightened journey. I have been able to learn
more, see more, meet exciting and intriguing people, understand more and
perceive more. I take it in today’s date that 5/7 crore is nothing compared to
these treasure I have accumulated in all these years. By the end of the journey,
I have been blessed with a house, a car and all other items of convenience. Yet
somewhere within, I am still a nomad, a beggar. I have lived in a shanty colony
till 14. That is why; it has been a blessing that I am not materialistic or
worldly-wise.
I am afraid you may meet
an end like Christopher from ‘Into The Wild’ (2007), leaves his house and even
his dead body doesn't return.
(Laughs)...I
am dying to work... lots of it. I would like to make my existence relevant.
There is so much to change. I wish to bring some change midst this mediocrity
and hideousness.
You intend to become the
Arvind Kejriwal of the film industry? At least you are trying?
Well...
yeah!!
How much of this can be
done?
I
am so much in support of Kejriwal. If 4/5 such people stand up, it will be of
great fun.
And you say this when
people are jeering or mocking him on social media?
Even
I can come up with 20 things which I don’t like. It’s one of our fundamental
rights to disagree. However, for disagreeing to, we need a platform. When there
is no platform, what is the basis of this disagreement? Also, one cannot
disagree with Manmohan Singh. His agreement itself is disagreement. You cannot
disagree with Narendra Modi even. At least, we can differ on issues with
Kejriwal. We can stand on a common dais even, and differ. At least, he has
tried coming up with a platform where we can differ. And that is where making
jibes at him becomes easy; finding loopholes in his arguments becomes easy. I,
however, am extremely optimistic about the entire development. I have my full
trust on people like Prashant Bhushan. They can really carve out a difference.
Fine... let’s come back to
SOT then! When did you start? When did you end? And what were the obstacles?
It
all started in 2008. We were busy with some other concepts. However, we started
writing in 2009. We shot in 2010. The post-production started in 2011 and
continued till last year. It premiered in Toronto Film Festival. We faced
problems similar to the problems every Indie filmmakers face. And maybe a
little bit more as it was not an easily digestible film. This is not a film for
the Hindustani audience only, it is a film for the entire world. This film will
ask for your participation and will not make you relax and have popcorn. It
will ask for a full 2.54 hours of meditation. And thus, the first problem that
we faced was regarding the money. There was a basic question, who would fund
such a film? And here, I would reiterate that we have been lucky enough to have
a producer like Soham (Shah) who has been on the same plane as me from day one.
We connected instantly and decided we would make films together for the rest of
our lives. And talking of actor Soham, whoever has seen his acting has
expressed desire to sign him for their next project. Deepa Mehta, Ashim
Ahluwalia (Miss Lovely), Anil Kapoor, even Amir spoke of him highly. And that’s
what helped me in completing the project, getting a gem of a partner like
Soham. And thus, it has helped me to get rid of the big production houses,
corporate houses who otherwise would have failed to perceive “SOT” at that
point of time. Now that the film is made, everybody is happy and speaking
highly of it. Had it not been made, few would have come to know what got
aborted. The problem lies in the fact that we have tried to create a new
cinematic language through the film. We wanted to make a film for the world and
not for India alone. It was an invention. So, we faced similar problems that
happen in case of every invention.
How was the visual planning
of the film done? Was it as per the conventional route? Or was it as per your
convenience throughout the last 4/5 years?
DOP
of this film, Pankaj Kumar, is very close to me. We spend lots of time
together, we sit together, discuss together, ideate together, jam together,
challenge each other, quarrel, dissect and deconstruct films and understand
films. We have planned a really long journey. Pankaj had shot my last short
“Continuum”, too. It was post-Continuum that we started jamming and bouncing off
ideas. Coming to the visual language of a film, my major part of the visual
storyboard gets prepared during the time of scripting itself. That is why I
keep falling back on discussions. And then, we rehearse, start casting and
then, the final phase of the visual language gets completed.
SOT talks of a unique take
on life. Be it the photographer, be it the reality around us, Death itself, what
made you come here?
It
has been a long journey. It all started during my childhood. We were born in a
secular family. Middle-class sentiments and values surrounded us, cornered us.
I had no belief in religion, in Gods, in Heaven. There were so many questions
within my head. For example, I came to realize that this entire concept of
mythology was born out of human fear. Gods were born out of a fear psychosis. I
came to realize that all these concepts of transcendence and immortality had
originated from a sense of fear and insecurity. The fear of death has given
rise to concepts like humans, gods, death, hell, heaven, reincarnation ... and
I, on the other hand, have fought Death by its horns since I was 13/14 years
old. I have delved deep into the concept of transcendence. I am in fact making
a film whose working title is “A Better Place”. The central theme revolves
around the fact there has been one single lie told and retold throughout the
last 13000 years of civilization and has resulted in massacres and genocides
and civil wars. The lie talks about a better place somewhere else. I have been
interacting with such questions since I developed my own voice. I was 16/17
years old when I met Philosophy and left my home at that point for a spiritual
shopping. Went to different places. Met different people. That is why for me
the journey towards SOT started long back. I left college as I was totally
dissatisfied with the formal education. I decided to design my education. And
that helped me learn all those things that I (have) always wanted to learn.
These learning formed the basis for my play, for my shorts and now for SOT.
You stayed at ashrams,
talked to various people. There is a thin line among being religious, exploring
religion and staying with religious people. You have been staying at ashrams,
you have been experiencing idol worship and you have also been trying to get
inside religion to know more about it. Didn't you feel at any point that you
might get corrupted or contaminated from within?
It
was very important for me to get to the bottom of things, to get to the core of
a certain phenomenon. However, whenever I have started reading a book or mixing
with certain individual, the intention was never to pick out the shortcomings.
On the contrary, I always felt that I would be given at least one insight which
I was still unknown about. Whenever I have met a book or a person, I met with
utmost sincerity and modesty. And this process has helped me to understand
people better and empathize with their shortcomings. The same has been a part
of SOT too. Whenever any one of my characters has gone in search of truth,
empathy has been a part of the journey. Even if the character fails in their
pursuit, the empathy comes out not because he /she failed, but because he / she
tried. I was reading an economist once, Matt Ridley. He was pointing fingers at
Adam Smith, Karl Marx. But then, at one point, came an interesting quote from
him. He said that he is not claiming that he is smarter than Adam Smith;
however he has one standing advantage over Smith. He points out that Smith hasn't read him while he has read Smith. This is exactly what I intend to say;
I have this benefit over Buddha, Mahavir, Einstein, Darwin, Dawkins that I have
read all of them. Thus, I need not make a wheel, or a Mercedes or a jet. I need
to go beyond this. I need to put my entire effort to create something larger
than the sum of the whole.
Than do you suggest we go
through all these learning and philosophies before watching SOT to get a better
understanding of all the teachings embedded in your film?
Well,
if you do your homework and go, it will be a bit helpful in getting the
messages right. However, even if you go with a clean slate, it will not be an
issue. There have been people who have come to watch SOT without any baggage.
The Sutherland jury gave us a special award, Tokyo gave us the award for the
best artistic film, Mumbai gave us an award for technical excellence, Dubai
awarded us for the best actress. People came and hugged me. Reviewers across
the world have given us good ratings. The more you relate yourself to the journey;
the better will be your bonding with the film. And if you are yet to take that
journey, I presume this film will push you a bit towards that.
And how many of these
crazy, eccentric filmmakers do you idolize?
Bela
Tarr, yes definitely! Roy Andersson, Swedish filmmaker, is definitely making it
to this list. His “Songs from the Second Floor” (2000) was a completely crazy
film. And I would specially mention Michael Haneke, whose “The Seventh
Continent” is pretty much close to the questions which I have tried to raise
through my films. And his “The White Ribbon” (2009) is one of my favorite
films. Bela Tarr’s “The Turin Horse” (2011) was one of the craziest movies I
have ever watched. The sound designer of that film, Gabor ifj Erdtelyi, is the
sound designer of my film too. Gabor thinks, you can ask him by the way, that
if “The Turin Horse” is the question, SOT is the answer. This is a huge
gratification for me. I’m not being pompous, but yes, SOT does answer TTH’s
question in an objective manner. Kieslowski’s works, too, are very much
relevant to me. My favorite Kieslowski film is “A Short Film About Killing”
(1988). The more I peel it off, the more layers it comes up with. Kieslowski’s
observation on humanity, and his signature way of embedding spirituality in
small dosages is very much significant to me in way. Finding significance in
the spiritual ambience created by Tarkovsky through his films is important to
me, too. Bergman’s stories are relevant too, for me. The way he treats his
characters, makes each of them palatable is unique and makes me uncomfortable. I
hate when things are made simpler or diluted. However, the way Tarkovsky
chooses his subjects, treats them, personifies their problems and projects them
is very much likeable. Speaking of contemporary filmmakers, Lars Von Trier is
one of them. I have had a love-hate relationship with his films, some
penetrating deep, others missing the mark by quite a few miles. However,
Dogville (2003) has been one such film which I loved. The film even worked on a
spiritual level for me.
And among the Korean filmmakers...?
Frankly
speaking, I don’t like them much. Yes, it’s a fact that they bring a nice
balance to the entire art; they know how to make better commercial films, films
which are aesthetically brilliant and logically better. I am neither a
Kim-Ki-Dook fan nor a John-Woo-Bong follower. Yes, I have seen some of John’s
films. I liked “Spring, Summer...” in parts but yes, that’s it! The film tried
to tell a story. The humor that John brings to the table is commendable, the
crisis that his characters undergo, say in Memories of Murder, is
understandable, but this is a common practice now. I also saw Kim’s latest,
Pieta. Yes there were some ideas which worked, the landscape and mounting was
pretty good; but it was good, not the best!
It has been a common
complaint of the Indie filmmakers in the past 1-and-a-half years that films of
this genre don’t get the required support. It doesn't get distributed properly,
hall-owners doesn't indulge etc. How can we contribute more towards Indie
cinema? Can there be a format to it?
I
am optimistic about the entire scenario (though I am never pessimistic). But the
problem is not of that scale that it can be discussed with such grave concern.
Coming to your question, yes, it is a genuine problem. But I get irritated when
an Indie filmmaker specifically talks about this aspect. There is no money, no
distribution pattern, no audience... if such is the case; I would like to ask
where the Indie films were all this time? We are getting to see 4/5 Indie films
in recent times. You need to have 50/60 Indie films and then you can go and
negotiate with the distributors. I believe there’s a huge audience for the Indie
films. When SOT was being shown at various venues, people came up and asked why
they don’t get to see such a film more often. So when the producers and
distributors comment that such Indie films will not be accepted by the
audience, I wonder who are they demeaning and undermining. Are they questioning
their own merit? I am quite sure that people are hungry for meaningful cinemas;
it’s just this unholy nexus that is stopping us from reaching out further into
the wild. See what happened in case of iPhone. You cannot sell iPhones from a
MTNL centre. If you want to launch a new product, you have to market it in a
different format. We need to search (for) that new way. If Indie films are a new
product, we need to find out new ways to reach out too.
You said at the very
beginning that you designed your own education. How was the experience! And
what was the time-frame?
The
time a doctor takes or an architect takes to prepare... I took the same time to
prepare... it was approx 10 years... and you need such a time frame to meditate
and educate yourself. I decided at 16 that I will make films, developed some
plays and worked for the TV by the time I was 19. Went on to study some more
while I was 20/21 years. Made my 1st short film when I was 22.
Travelled to places for the 1st time during that phase itself. Made
my 2nd short film when I was 26. Travelled and explored more during
this phase. And it was during this time when not only films, number of other
things grew up inside me too. Just as you are talking about a
multiple-narrative story, it has been a multi-faceted education. In my opinion,
a filmmaker should have a hold over multiple things... sociology, anthropology,
economics, psychology, politics... and along with these, the craftsmanship too.
He / she should have an expertise in cinematography, photography, art, paint,
drama, theatre – all these elements that make the art of film-making a strong
point. In my 10-12 years of education, I managed to take in all of these in
small dosages! I feel am now ready as a filmmaker.
There are too many
subjects on the platter. Do you think 12 years is enough for a respectable
grasp on all these subjects? The question arises because all these subjects
branch out into many directions as you go deep into each of them.
Well
I went on preparing myself as time passed by. If you would watch my 1st
film, you will notice that I was not prepared. There were so many weak points.
“Right Here, Right Now” was made while I was 22. And the film had the innocence
and fragility of a 22 year old. I went on to strengthen that fragility with
time.
What are the films that
Anand Gandhi decides to go on making in the future?
I
would like to go on and explore subjects of such similar origin only. Subjects
like transcendence, disease, age, old-age, death, institutions, rules and
power... subjects which are relevant to me. I am so keen to learn more about
the elements on which my current scripts are based upon. I am developing a
script on grand unified theory. This is a topic which has raised a very
significant and pertinent question. How is illusion made and how it distracts
people? I consider myself as a student of science and philosophy. I will
continue to take interest in matters that are related to both of these two
topics.
Will you like to be a part
of Bollywood or Hindi cinema as a whole, in the long run?
I
fail to restrict myself within the realms of a language or the budget. If I am
to restrict myself, it would be only on the basis of a subject. I am currently
developing 2 scripts which have a budget of 20-40 crore. Thus, it is evident
that these films will be neither Hindi nor Indie. Like in SOT too, the language
is broken into 3 parts. 40% is in English, 40% is Hindi and the rest 20% is
sub-broken into Arabian and Swedish. Even in “Right Here...” the characters
spoke in their mother tongue. It is very annoying to me when you show a Tamil
character speaking English in a local accent. I believe if a character is
Swedish, he / she would speak in the mother tongue. If he / she is from Bihar,
the dialect would be in Chota Nagpuri or Bhojpuri.
You mentioned that you
made up your mind about film-making when you were 16. Please let us know about
that time-period... we all know this is a difficult age to take any decision,
to zero upon anything.
I
had it all clear when I was a child. I saw “Mera Naam Joker” when I was four. I
decided to become a joker then. As I grew up, I decided I would be a scientist.
I nurtured that dream within me for a couple of years and then, I started
acting while in middle-school. So, all these dreams were in me in a cumulative
format. I was preparing myself to be a joker, a scientist and an actor too.
When I was 14/15, I realized film is a medium where you can be all-a joker, a
writer, an actor, a scientist, a philosopher – everything. At 16, I went on and
decided to be a filmmaker.
How has the reaction from
your family been? Who all are there in your family?
My
mother has been a huge fan of popular culture. To her, the world is made up of
stages, cinema, actors, and specially, popular literature. And she used to tag
me along to theaters plays and cinemas. My heroes have always been scientists
and poets. My mother used to wonder at writers, poets and actors. And I think I
have been contaminated by that same germ, too. I have been raised by my mother
and grandmother. My mother has been a single woman since I was of 7 years. We
got separated from my father during that time. My grandmother had all the saints
and monks of the world as her heroes; she used to read and talk about them all
day long. My mother had the poets and writers as poets and heroes. So I had
known, since my childhood, that it’s cool to be one of them. Thus, while my
mother and grandmother wanted me to be a CA or MBA, which was on a superficial
level. On the inside, when in wanted to walk down this line, nobody said
anything. Everybody had this strong belief that I know about my choices. As I
had a rough childhood, laced with poverty, I had matured fast enough to
understand everything. Thus, when I made my intentions clear, there were no
oppositions. Yes, there were doubts and questions, but there was no place for
negotiation.
How do you remember your
father as? What were his character traits?
I
barely remember him. We got separated while I was 6/7 years old. He passed away
due to a genetic disorder. I was 12/13 year old then. I have some memories
while I was 6/7 years old. My world had 3 people then – my mother and my
grandparents. While I was 15, my mother remarried. Mt step father went on to
become a part of my world. However, I was lucky to have a sense of reasoning
and ego even while there was a strong monetary crisis.
There would have been no
challenge without the hardships. They seem to complement each other. What’s
your take on such an angle?
Yes...
absolutely. My grandmother even started acting in my serials. She became so
famous that she was mobbed whenever she used to visit any small town or her
home-town.
Which was the serial she
acted in?
First things first ... !
Those were shabby serials written by me. You could catch my grandmother in
“Kyun Ki...” where she played the role of the grandmother named Godavari. She
was a comic relief. The character was short of hearing and used to hear things
in their wrong meaning. She has also acted in 2/3 other serials. I cannot
recollect the others.
Don’t you get disappointed
at times? Which are the films that bring you out of the pit during those times?
I
have been neck-deep into my films for the last 4/5 years. But yes, there are
books, there are writers, from whom I draw a sense of positivity in troubled
times. There is Richard Dawkins from whom I learn so much, each time. And then
there is this film, which I have watched 30/35 times in total, which has been
my guilty pleasure – The Matrix (1999). I also love Cameron Crowe’s Almost
Famous (2000). I also loved “Goodwill Hunting” (1997) – somewhere down the
line, I can relate it to my friends.
Now that you are talking about
“The Matrix”, do you have the same feeling for films like “Looper”, “Killing
Them Softly” or “The Dark Knight Rises”?
I
loathe “The Dark Knight Rises”.
But there was this “Occupy
Wall Street”-type philosophy?
Commercial
films manage to achieve such a level these days. It’s a common phenomenon.
There’s nothing path-breaking in it. And then, this film over-simplifies
things. As if, everything can be achieved so easily. I haven’t seen “Looper”. I
will watch it if you say so. I haven’t had the chance to watch “Killing...” as
I was busy with my own film.
Your take on “Inception”?
I
found it disgusting. It’s so easy if you ask me.
But the entire
film-fraternity across the globe goes ga-ga once Nolan hits the screen!
Yes...
that’s one point. But if you notice minutely, you will observe that Nolan’s
films will make you feel intelligent. But once you come out of the auditorium,
ask yourself whether you are really intelligent or not. The films answer
everything in such an easy manner, almost like spoon-feeding the entire thing
to you. There is a manipulative structure present within the film which I have
strong objection to. I used to do the same in my plays, where the audience used
to feel intelligent and shocked. It is easy to throw in a concept and make the
audience feel they have witnessed something brilliant. On the contrary, it is
tough to convert it into a coherent film.
How do you perceive the
works of stalwart Indian directors like Adoor, Ray, Nihalani, Benegal and
others? Are their films still relevant to you?
When
I was young, these people helped me to grow up. It’s my bad luck I have not
been able to sustain a lasting relationship with any Indian filmmaker till
date. There is no Indian filmmaker whose films build up my entire universe.
There’s Ray, whose 4/5 films have helped me grow up, learn the craftsmanship
and are still relevant to me. Other than that, there’s no Hindustani filmmaker
who still holds a place within me. When I was 16/17 years old, I used to watch
all of them and John Abraham and Kumar Sahni and Mani Kaul etc. When I Saw
Kamal’s (Swarup) “Om Dar Ba Dar” (1988), it hit me like an alien. But those
were till I was of 20 years. The relations didn’t last. I miss being in a
relation with any Indian filmmaker or writer.
Any magical film that
reminds you of your childhood days? Now that you have grown up, learnt and seen
so much, what all films do you still remember from those days, when you knew
nothing?
I
will never be able to watch those films again. But if you want me to recollect,
yes, “Mera Naam Joker”, “Jaagte Raho”, “Utsav” (Girish Karnad), “Deewar and
“Karma” would top the list. Those were the films which I used to idolize at
that point.
All time best Indian and
Foreign films everyone should see!
“Apu
Trilogy” (1955-59) – a must-see Indian film. I would like to collate all 3 into
one single film and watch it non-stop. It is one of those films which is still
as strong in my conscience as it was for the 1st time. Then there is
“A Short Film About Killing” (1988) by Kieslowski, “Solaris” (1972) by
Tarkovsky, “Songs from the 2nd Floor” (2000) by Michael Haneke and
“Weickmeister Harmonies” (2000) by Bela Tarr.
You mentioned
Krishnamoorthy earlier. Who have you read among Osho, Krishnamoorthy, Gita,
Aldous Huxley, Deepak Chopra...?
All
of them. While I was 16/17 years old, I used to wake up with Krishnamoorthy
(Jidu Krishnamoorthy), sit with Aldous Huxley, Bertrand Russell and Harvard
Spencers. They have all been an immense source of inspiration for me. If I may
recollect before that, I had a friendship with Gandhi, Ayn Rand and John Donne
while I was 15. My love for philosophy started through frictions and later on,
crossed over to non-fictions. I have always had a decent relationship with
Osho. His teachings weren't new to me but relevant. However, with Kabir, I have
a relation till date. Somewhere down the line, we have a strong bonding, ties
that exist between two ascetic people. Even when I read Dawkins, I got to understand
microbiology and evolutionary psychology. I also got to understand Dennis Bray
as a result. I also admire Lewis Thomas. Dennis Bray’s “Wetwear: A Computer in
Every Living Cell” (2009) and Lewis Thomas’ “The Lives of a Cell: Notes of a
biology watcher” (1974) have played immense role in my life. They have embedded
and fulfilled the scientific part of philosophy and filled up the void with
their teaching.
When you read so many
philosophers, you often start having a feeling of being mislead otherwise.
People feel like they have been duped and told lies this whole time. What do
you feel? Do these philosophers drive you mad? Or do they really show you the
way?
I
was preparing my own road. I was searching for my own direction. Nobody was the
guide here. I was looking for facts and data among all of them. Whosoever was
giving me facts and data, I kept them; rest, I threw them out of the window. I
have a problem with establishment since day one. One of my friends has been
researching on a topic which tells that most of the philosophers starting from
Jean Paul Sartre to Friedrich Nietzsche to Socrates, nobody had their father
upon them. Either they were orphans or they were raised by their mother. Thus, they are have been no love or fear or
obedience in them towards the establishment. Mothers are institutions too, but
of a different nature. They are more fluid, more supportive. So, maybe, at a
psychological level, I think I had developed this anti-establishment factor
since the beginning. There has been no instance where somebody has lead or
misguided me. I have been independent since day one.
You have accepted the
factual, regretted the non-factual(s). Any particular example?
Both
Jainism and Buddhism helped me develop my conscience when I was 17. Now Jainism
has lessons which have a factual basis. There are lessons which try and bring
in a social balance, a political balance. For example, they observed that one
should be more responsible towards Nature because men share a cause-consequence
relationship with Nature. This point can be debated, quantified and understood
on a cognizance level. Again, Jainism talks about a polar mountain, and that
the world is revolving around it, and that there are seven Heavens and seven
Hells etc. This doesn't mean anything to me. I have taken into account those
arguments which are questionable, arguable and quantifiable. Neither have I
called myself a Hindu, or a Christian, or a Jain, or a Buddhist. Neither am I an
Osho follower, nor am I a Krishnamoorthy fan. Krishnamoorthy has himself said
that if one is following him, then he / she ceases to follow the truth. Even
Osho said that one should disperse immediately after Osho’s death. There should
be no shops or museums in his memory. I came across all of these during my
spiritual shopping days. So, I would be a fool if declare myself as a part of
any institution. If we are talking about gravity, an important question is why
is an object falling towards the ground? However, the answer is not that
because a bigger body attracts a smaller body. The answer is relativity.
Relativity doesn't declare the Theory of Gravity as wrong, but it incorporates
the hidden philosophy of gravity. Similarly, if I quote Matt Ridley,I would say
that I have an advantage over Krishnamoorthy since I have read him. And if I
may let go all of these teachings and pursue only the truth, a greater truth
emerges.
Raju in “Guide” speaks
philosophically during the fag-end of the movie. Can you recollect any mainstream
Hindi film whose philosophy touched you?
I
haven’t seen Guide. Will not be able to comment thus. Nut I cannot recollect
any other film which speak on such a plane.
The old couple sitting on
the bench in “Saarangsh” and how they say “Death happens but life goes on” in
the last scene ... it was on a different plane.
That
level is more or less achieved by almost all the Hindi films. Raj Kapoor’s
films had them. My childhood favorites “Mera Naam Joker”, “Utsav”, every one of
them spoke about such takes on life. Even the songs sometimes displayed a rare
scene of philosophy.
I will throw at you
certain words. You need to reply in one word.
Death
– Challenge
Life
– Process
Money
– Irrelevant tool
Nudity
– Truth
Cuss
words – Necessity
Blood
– The flowing red
Friendship
– Depth
Hanging
– Revenge of State
Philosophy
– Ever-changing
Your philosophy in life?
My
philosophy is to go on a search. I would like to search for a deeper
philosophy. One that would maintain a balance in our life. By life, I mean the
cosmic life. I intend to bring a balance in between my life and my universe. if
I search for the truth in a proper manner, life will flow in a consistent
manner and balance will prevail.
SOT has been to so many
festivals, has been viewed by so many across the globe. The best compliment
that have come so far...
There
have been praises from all fronts. For example, the comments on facebook. Though
there have been many comments, there’s this comment by Gabor which I must
share. It is in a way patting my own back, but however, I feel proud somewhere
deep inside. He said that whoever were shedding tears on learning Bela Tarr’s
retirement, should rejoice now that Anand Gandhi is here. I was shocked on
hearing this.
Will SOT reach out to the people?
Or do the people need to cross the barrier?
Both
ways. We need to come to the middle of the ocean. We are trying our level best
to give it a grand release. We are giving SOT the best release possible in
comparison to all the art house films made in India till date. Through this, we
will have travelled half the road. The other half will have to be traversed by
the audience themselves.
Yes... true... if people doesn't witness, it will be a loss for them.
I
strongly feel people will come and watch. At least, to those it matters. Also,
the shelf-life of this movie is pretty long. At least, a year and half. I feel
people will catch it once within that time-frame.
republished and transcreated with permission from Mr. Gajendra Singh Bhati, the man behind the original interview.
We thank Mr. Bhati for the opportunity.
Team SankyOnline
