Online edition of India's National Newspaper Friday, July 27, 2001 |
Front Page |
National |
Southern States |
Other States |
International |
Opinion |
Business |
Sport |
Entertainment |
Miscellaneous |
Features |
Classifieds |
Employment |
Index |
Home |
|
Entertainment
| Next
The legend lives on...Sivaji Ganesan's Photo Gallery
Sivaji Ganesan's voice and diction not only changed the course of
dialogue delivery in Tamil films and plays, but also had a deep
impact in the manner in which the language is spoken by narrators
on Radio and Television. This is perhaps the most impressive
contribution of the thespian, observes Dr. S. KRISHNASWAMY.
ALTHOUGH WE are constantly aware that we are all mere mortals, we
are unable to reconcile with the mortality of some people.
``Sivaji'' Ganesan is one such - an immortal in our minds.
``Long live Bharathan....'' blessed Rajaji, after the film
``Sampoorna Ramayanam'' was screened for him. Sivaji Ganesan had
performed the role of Bharatan. Those brief words of Rajaji, who
rarely watched films, were unconsciously pregnant with identical
ideas of film historians and researchers on Tamil Cinema. ``In
the desert of Tamil films, an actor by name Sivaji Ganesan is an
oasis'', I had said, in my article on Tamil films for an American
arts magazine in the 1970s. Earlier, Erik Barnouw and I, in the
first edition of our book ``Indian Film'' (1963), had commented,
``Seldom has substantial talent been used more recklessly or
profitably''. A world-class actor remained a regional star,
essentially because the ethos of Tamil Cinema was never in the
wavelength of world cinema - celebrated as the Seventh Art. But
even a diehard enthusiast of realism in films, had to sit up and
watch Sivaji. That one hand gesture of Bharatan, meaning ``lets
go'', in ``Sampoorna Ramayanam'' is not merely etched in my
memory, but has been adapted, and re-enacted by a hundred film
actors, and even classical dancers on stage.
It was often worth spending the nearly three hours watching
immature story lines and inept directorial handling, to
experience those sparks of true genius of an inimitable actor -
Sivaji. His performance was stylised - drawing from the
immeasurable depth of India's racial memory of many millennia,
from artistes of ancient Tamil and Sanskrit Theatre. This was
often erroneously described or even criticised as ``over-
acting''. Well, if your theme is melodrama, your performance has
to match it. But Sivaji Ganesan's range and immense versatility,
did not confine him to this stylised performance alone. He could
challenge any actor of the realistic school, when the need, the
story and character demanded it. His career's best performance
(in my opinion) as V. O. Chidamabaram Pillai in ``Kappalottiya
Thamizhan'', puts him on a pedestal among the all-time- greats of
world cinema, as an actor. The biographical, which was well
researched, gave him the scope to re-create the ambience,
maintaining the integrity of character - the realistic human side
of a great patriot of the Freedom Struggle.
In contrast however, many fans remember him for his melodramatic
portrayal of Kattabomman. Although made by the same creative team
which was responsible for the suave, artistic and authentic
``Kappalottiya Thamizhan'', ``Veerapandiya Kattabomman'' was
historically far from accurate. It was more like a costume drama
or a mythological. Sivaji's performance was in tune with that
treatment. Even today, nearly four decades after the release of
the film, when enthusiastic parents bring their children for
audition to perform in our TV serials, the boys invariably
deliver Sivaji's dialogue from ``Veerapandiya Kattabomman'' to
demonstrate their histrionics. Sivaji Ganesan's voice and Tamil
diction not only changed the course of dialogue delivery in Tamil
films and plays, but also had a deep impact in the manner in
which Tamil is spoken by narrators on Radio and Television.
Unique among the film styles of the world, song sequences in our
films constitute an inheritance from ancient Indian theatre.
There was indeed, no one to beat Sivaji in ``rendering'' the
songs. Never for a moment would you feel that he was lip-wagging
for the playback singer, since his gestures and mannerisms were
emotive manifestations of consummate skill, artistry and flair,
unlikely to be matched even by original singers.
Apart from the infrequent courtesy calls, I have had the
privilege of talking in-depth to ``Nadigar Thilakam'' - as his
fans reverentially called him - three times. First was my hour-
long interview for the first edition of ``Indian Film'', in 1962;
the second in the 1970s for a Bombay-based film magazine and the
third for an American Academic journal in the 1980s. He has
sometimes been described as one constantly wearing an actor's
mask - that he conversed as though he was delivering a dialogue.
On the contrary, at least some parts of my interactions with him
revealed a simple, transparent personality. For instance, soon
after his return from his first trip abroad (to America as an
invited guest of that Government), I asked him ``How was
America?'' He first said, ``You have studied there. What am I
going to tell you about America?''
``I mean your own reactions - how did you enjoy the visit?'' I
asked.
With hardly a moment of hesitation there was a sincere answer.
``First I was struck with wonder. Then I was uncomfortable and
felt embarrassed. Gradually, I felt very happy'', and then he
expanded, ``The first impression of wonder was with the sights
which were beyond what I had imagined. I was then uncomfortable
because, I felt I was just another face in the crowd. Having got
used to the attention of my people back in Tamil Nadu, it was a
strange embarrassment to walk in crowded streets without anyone
taking a second look at me. Gradually, I felt it meant at the
same time, a rare liberty to be myself. And I enjoyed that''. It
was candid, childlike and unpretentious.
In another session, I asked him ``Do you feel that you are not
being used to your fullest potential, because of the limitations
of Tamil cinema?''
``I can put it this way. I want to function as a fountain pen. My
ambience expects me to perform as a pencil. Sometimes this
results in my writing as a ball-point pen'' he described, in
graphic terms.
In 1986, I was addressing The Washington Institute for Values in
the US Capital, on the subject ``Culture As Political
Phenomena''. In the small group of high profile audience, a
senator, surprisingly well-informed about India, asked, ``Why is
your great actor Sivaji Ganesan not politically successful like
your M.G. Ramachandran?''.
I quoted from the narration of my biographical TV documentary on
MGR. My narration says, ``The MGR Phenomenon was an amalgam of
fact and fiction, dream and reality. The only archetype character
he performed in all his films was of a hero who combined in
himself the strength of a Hercules, the modernity of a James Bond
and the love and compassion of a Jesus Christ''. The political
value of this ingenious image is unparalleled in the history of
media.
On the contrary, Sivaji Ganesan was the last word in versatility,
performing any role of any shade - often that of a tragic hero,
the self-pitying brother, the negative womaniser of
``Thirumbipaar'', the treacherous foreign spy of ``Andha Naal''.
He performed these different roles as a true artiste,
interpreting every shade of character with ingenuity, involvement
and ``finesse''. There was no fusion of an off-screen image and
an on-screen image, to create a political mascot. Hence Sivaji
Ganesan's attempt to build a political brand-equity failed. It
was certainly a price worth paying - for he will be remembered as
one of the greatest actors of modern India.
In my ``MGR Phenomenon'' I had said, ``Although MGR was an actor
by accident, he was a mature politician by deliberate choice''.
It will be equally true to say, ``Although Sivaji Ganesan
stumbled into politics, he was a born actor par excellence - a
thespian of whom India will be eternally proud''.
Dr. S. Krishnaswamy (who holds his M.A. & Ph.D. in films from
Columbia University) makes documentary films and television
serials. He is a historian of Indian Cinema and a Media Analyst.
Send this article to Friends by E-Mail
|
|
Section : Entertainment Next : Film Review: Dhil | |
Front Page |
National |
Southern States |
Other States |
International |
Opinion |
Business |
Sport |
Entertainment |
Miscellaneous |
Features |
Classifieds |
Employment |
Index |
Home | |
Copyrights © 2001 The Hindu Republication or redissemination of the contents of this screen are expressly prohibited without the written consent of The Hindu |