THE SHIP OF THESEUS!
This Gandhi’s ‘experiments
with the truth’ affected me deeply. That’s rare! There are some films I can
talk of in terms of ‘wonderful cinematography’, ‘outstanding transformation’,
‘a tad long’, ‘could do with at least 25 minutes less’ etc. A case in point is
‘Bhaag Milkha Bhaag’, which I thoroughly enjoyed. (It obliterated the disaster
that ‘Delhi 6’ was, in which the fantastic score by A R Rahman was criminally
wasted!). So Rakeysh Om Prakash Mehra really made a good film about an Indian
legend. The value of the film increases for me because our sporting legends are
constantly being seen these days as being easily corrupted by money. Not all
sporting legends would gladly give up the rights of a film based on their lives
for Re.1/=. But then that’s Milkha Singh (and half the battle’s won by the film
maker given the legend he has decided to base his film on….add to that he has
Farhan, Pavan, Divya, Binod Pradhan, Shankar Ehsaan and Loy and the rest of his
very talented crew and he has a winner). But this piece is not about ‘Bhaag
Milkha Bhaag’.
This is about my
response to Anand Gandhi’s ‘Ship of Theseus’. So much has been said about its
virtues by people who are infinitely more talented, erudite thinkers and film
makers the world over that it would be crazy of me to talk of the film’s merits
in cinematic terms. The merits are abundant. But what I love about the film is
the fact that it has a discourse. In our media very little is offered by way of
a peaceful discourse between human beings. I stress peaceful because
1) There’s a paucity
of respect for opposing viewpoints…period!
2) The causality of
one’s actions is always glossed over by blame game.
3) Everyone talks
and no one listens, therefore ANY discourse or ANY solution to even the smallest
problem can never be arrived at.
The film starts with
Aida who listens to everything around her very carefully. She is a photographer
who is visually challenged, but she is not visionless just because she can’t
see! You might not see as much once you get your sight back because then you
lose control of the other senses that are helping you to compensate for the one
you didn’t have. There’s also the relationship with the one with sight, Aida’s
boyfriend. He is happy to relinquish control over her art allowing her to make
the decisions because he also wants to compensate for her lack of independence.
If she were sighted, would her boyfriend have been more honest and forceful
about his impressions of her photographs? What stunning photos they are!
I can’t get her
assured face, with those opaque eyes, and her eager ears, out of my mind. I can’t
get the way she listens out of my mind. A whole new Mumbai opened up to me by
the way she listened.
Maitreya and Charvaka
form the next story. It is a haunting one. There is such depth in simplicity
and starkness. It churns something deep down in your gut. The witty exchanges
between the young Charvaka and the middle aged Maitreya make for some of the
best exchanges I’ve heard in a long while and their wit is a great foil for the
complicated thoughts and beliefs they are discussing. This is also the story
that I personally related to the most because as a true believer of the Gandhian
principles of non-violence, I keep asking myself hypothetical questions that
severely test my moral fibre. When I see the buzzing fly and imagine what it
could do to Maitreya’s bed sores I want to swat it that minute, non-violence be
damned! If I react to fiction in this manner, am I truly non-violent in
reality? Can we be faithful to our values and principles even under extreme
circumstances? Does being rigidly non-violent end up being more violent in a
way we hadn’t thought of? Does being rigidly independent end up making it more
difficult for your significant others, making them suffer at times? Can extreme
virtue be cruel? Is Maitreya’s decision of accepting a donated liver, a cop out
or a higher understanding of truth?
A sea of lush green
grass dancing at the whim of the wind separates Maitreya from Navin.
Navin is a person
anybody could relate to. We’ve seen so many like him. He can’t separate himself
from his stocks and shares. His world view changes when his activist Ajji makes
him question his singular view of life. She is disappointed in his selfish
living and feels one should go beyond oneself. Navin, like the aam aadmi
wonders what the use of that is. But it sets him questioning himself. That is
the first step to change. And Navin has a new mission. Navin discovers a sense
of giving back to society. The compassion already exists in him (amply shown by
the gentle, selfless way he gives his Ajji the bedpan) He also comes in touch
with the harsh reality that sometimes your battle for a higher truth might not
be looked upon in the same way by the person you are trying to help. At the end,
this is all there is. I feel much better about 45% of my income being taxed now, though
they don’t translate into any returns in terms of infrastructure. That’s all
there is!
Sensing to Thinking
to Feeling….the discourse is done through the body….a body common to all! Aida
gets eyes, Maitreya gets a liver and Navin a kidney….all from the same body of
that one brain dead man. Was he more helpful in his death than he was in his lifetime?
At the end, the sum
of the parts of that one man, watch, as a shadow of the man who helped them
live, goes deep inside a cave. Almost like a soul on the quest to eternal
salvation, the shadow comes across beautiful sparkling stones in the cave and
with the help of a lamp goes deeper and deeper.
Will he find a light
inside the cave?
Will there be
complete darkness, or riches, or happiness?
Will there be a new
civilisation, the kind we can never imagine?
Will there be an end
or will there be a beginning?
Thank you Anand
Gandhi for this Ship of Theseus! Whether the planks are old or new, whether it
is then the same ship or a different one, I loved travelling in it with a bunch
of intelligent, witty, talented, compassionate, gentle, and above all, very humane beings. What
more do I want from life?
