Paheli Ki Paheli
Sometimes it has to be this way. Sometimes you have to think. There are so many times one gets lost in disbelief of himself. I mean, we all are meant to reason out things, the way they are. After all that is what reasoning is all about. But, there are times things flash in - into, your mind and you begin looking at them in an altogether different light.
Paheli - an Amol Palekar movie starring Shahrukh Khan, Rani Mukherji, Anupam Kher, Sunil Shetty and a guest appearance of the formidable 'numero-uno-man-show' - Amitabh Bacchan himself, was to most of us, quiet a forgettable movie, at first look. It did miserably at the box-office, did not find admirers in the media and many could not accept the fact that it was the Indian entry to that year's Oscars ceremony, under the foreign film category. All of this, however, was something that came back to me a year later albeit during a 'chilled' stupor last night.
'At first look' because I watched the last half an hour of the movie (the first time since I had watched it in the Ahmedabad theatre during my college days). There was nothing unusual about the theatrics. Sharukh trying to earnestly control the inimitable, trademark stutter in dialogue delivery - trying to camouflage in a husky, deeper voice to incorporate the ethnic settings of the character. Rani Mukherji as the quintessential Indian village belle - wife of a traditional household and romancing a ghost, with a deep sense and portrayal of the stretched character (off the records - 'how I love this woman!'). Anupam Kher will be the conservative, comic relief. And Mr. Amitabh Bacchan - dress him a pauper and put him in the background and it would make the most compelling background that would pale any foreground to shame. Yes, it is the very same movie and yet not what I saw in it when I looked the second time around.
First look - rural, second look - urban; First look - Utopian, second look - sarcastic; First look - folk tale, second look - camouflage. Let me explain.
I think it was a movie of distinct urban symbolism. Starting from the ending sequence - 'the puppet song', as I take the liberty of calling it, is a stark portrayal of urban lifestyle. Very far fetched? I don't think so. We feed on media. We are controlled by higher authority. Our 'happy life' is a controlled system of effectiveness and productivity. I mean, we have got these strict rules to follow. Romance - by serenading or dancing but only in the evening. Dance - with your partner but it should be surreal in your mind. Partner - has to be beautiful, even if not media promoted 36-24-36 but close to it.
Now let me write the storyline in a sentence. A married woman falls in love and mothers a child off a ghost after her husband, bound by his business commitment, leaves her back at home - alone. Forget the words 'a ghost' and add two words 'another man', replace 'business' by 'professional' and 'leaves her back at home - alone' by 'cannot afford to spend much time with her'. You get this, 'A married woman falls in love and mothers a child off another man after her husband, bound by his professional commitment, cannot afford to spend much time with her'. How many times have you heard of this? Is this urban or is this rural? Is this folklore or is this bare truth? Is it the ghost or is it the yearned and lost romance of a housewife under such circumstances? Is it desperately emotional or is it justified - considering even women have been given equal rights to file divorces and exercise choice on their life-partners, but not remotely prominent in rural areas. What else would you call the clever interplay of the 'good' shepherd? Is it not the Law constrained by opposing forces of development and conservative moral policing, which finally takes recourse to clever manipulations?
However, the part which really takes the icing on the cake (according to me, mind you - you may differ all together to this entire article. I have no qualms - I will not watch the movie thrice!) the reunion of the 'ghost' with his lady love. Think now. Thought up? It is not 'happy Bollywood endings for audience pleasure'. It is still not 'folklore'. It is not the triumph of 'love'. Think agin. It is a strong statement of 'metro-sexuality' where rather than a rigid viewpoint of a angry cuckold exuding typical Indian machismo, it is the husband himself who transforms and begins to understand his wife's needs, changes his lifestyle and resets his priorities right. To me the character of the woman was betrayed twice. First, the 'ghost' who would never have the guts to stand out against a huge India social structure. Second, she lost the macho husband to a milder version comprising both machismo and softness. All she settles for in the end is a compromise and that is so real. We men refuse vehemently to be something lese than what we are before we settle down. The women, if I am not mistaken, refuse to accept that there is never the best till they relent. And then both let go of everything almost desperately and what remains are but compromises, laws of averages and mediocricy.
On a lighter vein, the film might be suggesting the spurned urban husbands a solution to their errant housewives!
So that's a Paheli (meaning 'riddle') solved according to me. However, remember what I said. If you disagree I have never said I will disagree with you. For, here, I just chose to reason things not the way they are. I saw 'Paheli' as such a film which should not be reasoned the way it is. In the end a gentle thought if you thought this has been worth a read. What are those two ethnic Rajasthani wood 'puppets' doing there in the film with 'voice-overs'?
Cheer on...
*****
Etcetra's: Well, now that I am into movies I know which movie I am to write about next. (Hint: I am a proud Bengali at heart!)
