History or His Story?

In continuation to my earlier post…

As I lay on the ergonomically designed-for the-purpose bed, watching my blood gush into the pouch, I recollected the scene from Amar Akbar Antony where the three estranged brothers donate blood to their (also) estranged mother. The movie showed the blood being collected in a bottle fixed high on a drip-stand (!!) and then flowing down, simultaneously, to fill a bottle fixed onto another drip stand that was transfusing blood to the mother. I wonder why no doctor objected to this gross misrepresentation and scientific impossibility.

picture taken from the internet

Thankfully, there has been no report since of any case of blood transfusion done similarly! But the symbolism of that scene was probably a one-of-a-kind in the history of Indian cinema, taking creative liberties to an unbelievable extent.

Movies are to be viewed as entertainment, not as an educational campaign or even as a documentation of knowledge or an authority on a subject. This allows the makers creative liberties and cinematic licenses, and we accept that as being a part of entertainment, not as gospel truth. (Though, I must admit, I did take objection to A.R. Rehman and Prasoon Joshi being wrongly credited for the song from Delhi 6 - Bhor bhayi tori vaaT takata piya, a bandish in Raga Gurjari Todi sung by Ustad Bade Ghulam Ali Khan saab.). 

While I was driving back home a few days back, I happened to listen to the ‘Ghoomar’ song from the much publicised, soon to be released movie, Padmavati. The song is based, predominantly, on Raga Brindavani Sarang and also has glimpses of another lovely raga of the Sarang family - Madhmad Sarang. Once home, I searched for Gana Saraswati Smt. Kishori Amonkar’s rendition of Raga Madhmad Sarang and found myself lost in the splendour of the ragas of the family. I then stumbled upon her rendition in Raga Noor Sarang, a Raga I had never heard of before. Sometimes, movies could trigger that quest for more knowledge!

It’s a different matter that the people of Rajasthan are on an uprising against the release of the movie, claiming a distortion of historical facts. Since the story is based on Rani Padmini, also known as Padmavati, the high decibel, emotional debates even challenge the very existence of a queen by the name. Many historians accept that the practice of jauhar has been documented but not so the existence of a queen by the name. Some believe that she is a character of imagination. But the people of the State of Rajasthan (predominently) feel let down with respect to the history they take pride in, alleging that the movie has taken creative liberties to an extent beyond acceptable in inaccurate depictions of the attire worn by the royal ladies, the traditional groomar dance and the way the royalty conducted themselves.

When I visited Chittorgarh many years ago, I was taken around by a well spoken guide. He claimed that the ASI had found many skeletons at the site of the jauhar. Curious, I did find some report of the ASI pertaining to Chittorgarh but did nothing more than bookmark it at that time. The guide also took me to Rani Padmini’s chambers and showed me the place where she is supposed to have shown Khilji a reflection of herself in a mirror. A point that the guide did make was that the event was supposed to have occurred in the 13th century, a time when  silvered-glass mirrors weren’t yet invented and so they must have used a large metal sheet of some kind. He went on to tell me that the two queens who were known for their beauty were Rani Padmini and Rani Roopmati (of Malwa, who apparently poisoned herself when Mandu fell into the hands of the Mughals). 

Folklore has it that such was their beauty that when Rani Padmini ate paan (beetle-nut), the stain would be visible making its way down her slender throat and when Rani Roopmati drank water, one could see the water meander similarly! Unbelievable, alright, but surely a very romantic (albeit exaggerated) expression of beauty! I was left smiling at both, the description, as well as the straight-faced manner in which it was narrated to me. But as I had shared in one of my posts about my visit to the place, there was something about Chittorgarh that moved me greatly, as if I had shared a part of the rich history held within those walls of the fort. 

Art has often faced criticism and whether rightly so is the moot point. One could argue on the lines of creative license and freedom of speech and expression, but the sensitivities of people often win this battle. During the renaissance period in Italy, the Roman Catholic Council of Trent ruled that nudity in images of religious symbolism be avoided. Many statues had the fig leaf cover the genitals depicted in the nude statutes. This also gave rise to the use of ‘fig leaf’ as a metaphor in the English language! Art and creativity are a reflection of the times; though it may rely on history, it is often remodelled to suit the sensitivities of the time and allow for some room for creative expression.

Personally, history fascinates me. I often choose the places I visit based on the richness of the history the place has to offer. While I find it very intellectually stimulating and imaginatively fascinating, I also like to relate the past to the present, for much of what we are, they way are, has to do with how we were and what we faced. History influences the view of a society - the way they think, behave as a people, their life practices. But should we hold back in the name of history? Or should we respect the needs of the current times and its consequent adaptation of history? It’s hard for a society to comprehend and accept this when emotions run high. And, especially in this regard, movies are hardly an authentic chronicle of history - it’s just the narration of a story, inspired by history. For knowledge, we read and/or watch documentaries, which rely on more accepted and authentic sources for their bases.