It is difficult to describe Kumar Shahani. As a filmmaker, he objected to people calling him avant garde, because he considered himself a traditionalist — his teachers, including Ritwik Ghatak, D.D. Kosambi, Arolkar Bua, Pandit Jal Balaporia and Robert Bresson, were all traditionalists who were also radicals. His films were never targeted to anyone, not even to the filmmaker. Locating Shahani in a legacy of artistic disruptions allows us to see him as a filmmaker who paved a distinctive path of his own while simultaneously continuing a tradition of connecting with cultural traditions that are deeply-rooted in the past. His cinema, with its layers of poetry and quiet spectacle, makes one pause and think. It was not positivist cinema that emphasised on realism. It never sought to present the world as it was. Shahani believed that it was not realism that could get us very far because reality in an image has to be more than what the single frame could offer. Known for films that often felt like aesthetic encounters that defied easy linearity, Shahani also never believed in the concept of generation gap and consumerism. He believed that when a filmmaker works with a preconception about what an audience can understand or not understand, the scope of art would shrink. In our conversations, Shahani spoke about the importance of not just seeing a film, but making connections: The invisible made visible.
Shahani always stood against the market and the state. For him, both the institutions tend to kill art and so he always tried to do something else than what the market demanded or the state forced, inspired by gurus like Ritwik Ghatak, D.D. Kosambi, Arolkar Bua, Pandit Jal Balaporia and Robert Bresson. In today’s digital world of short-format content and streaming’s binge culture, when the aesthetics of cinema are dying and the audience’s attention span is shrinking rapidly, Kumar’s body of work feels keenly relevant.
The cinema of Kumar Shahani is different and distinctive. Along with his training in filmmaking, he was also drawn to the Gwalior school of khayal music, learnt under Vidushi Neela Bhagwat, Arolkar Bua, and Pandit Jal Balaporia. He was also a philosopher like Kosambi, who loved Sanskrit and used a lot of elements of Indian aesthetics, like from the Natyashastra, in his works.
In the essay titled Notes for an Aesthetic of Cinema Sound, Shahani noted, “BOTH THE SENSES of sight and sound, it may be noted, arose out of the need to perceive movement; to locate an object, and one's own relationship to it; to gauge the pressures at work; to achieve points of equilibrium and to move in a controlled manner not only from static point to static point, as we seemed to imagine in our classical civilisations, but to find in these different vibrations, and differences of pressure, the vitality of being itself.”
Here’s a companion guide to five films that serve as an introduction to the cinema of Kumar Shahani.
This was Kumar’s debut film. It was made in a budget of Rs. 2.5 lakh loaned by the National Film Development Corporation (NFDC). The concept of maya in Indian philosophy is as metaphysical as poetic. It is difficult to make sense and understand the medium at the first glance, it requires revisiting. The film opens with vertical lines of the ceiling followed by the horizontal line of clothes and then the windows and doorways, with a lullaby being played in the background. It is set in a feudal and patriarchal system, Taran is a wealthy landlord’s daughter who lives with her father and her widowed aunt in their ancestral house. In the midst of the labour union protests, Taran makes an unspoken romantic connection with a local railroad engineer. Her brother, who rejected the feudal setup, went to work for a tea estate, invites her to join him. The film tries to show us the bond between the individual and the society, through the relationship of Taran and her father. The feudal system also gave way to caste and class differences and contestations, but the modern times promised the undermined to assert their ‘limited’ agency. In philosophy, the union of space and time gives birth to nature, this divine union results in generations of beings that arise, each seemingly separate yet interconnected. However, the illusion of individuality fades when humanity looks inward, rediscovering the unity of all existence. The film peaks with a striking sequence of crane shots, showcasing Taran's exploration of her sexuality and aggression through Chhau, a dance form from the Mayurbhanj region.
Maya Darpan was famously criticised by Satyajit Ray who described it as “a combination of poor psychology and poorer stylization” and “gauche in its handling of the human element”. Partly as a result of this condemnation, it took Shahani 12 years to make his second film, Tarang. Sethji, a widowed businessman, leads a comfortable life with his daughter Hansa, son-in-law Rahul, and grandson Munna. Rahul serves as Sethji's right-hand man, while his nephew Dinesh assists in the business. However, petty rivalries and jealousy brew within the family, with Sethji and Rahul suspecting Dinesh of undermining their business. They devise a plan to remove him discreetly, which succeeds but takes a toll on Sethji's health, ultimately leading to his untimely demise. Controversy arises when Rahul embarks on an affair with the maidservant Janki. The film features Amol Palekar, Smita Patil, Girish Karnad, Om Puri, and Shreeram Lagoo.
Shahani directed this as a diploma film for an editing student called Nandini Bedi at the Film and Television Institute of India (FTII), inPune (Shahani was an alumnus and was part of FTII’s third batch, which is the first to be taught by Ritwik Ghatak). The film’s title credit shows a caged black duck with no option to escape. The character breaks the fourth wall and speaks to the spectator directly. It shows you the confinements of the machines yet the humane aspirations of being outside the confinement. One is reminded of the rich tradition of Indian miniature painting. Where there is a nayika, is either vasakasajja (one dressed up for union) or virahotkanthita (distressed by separation) and there is a monk who comes to get bhiksha (alms) and we then turn to the Sakhi, who asks the nayika to take a new path, to find freedom. It is a mix of traditional aesthetics and the technological world.
Shahani’s use of music, architecture or dance forms as aesthetic tools in his films were rich with intention and informed by a close study of the philosophical undertones of the disciplines he was drawing on in his cinema. In the khayal tradition of Hindustani classical music, a raga is explored in the format of alap-jod-bandish-tarana, where it starts with the serene exploration of the chosen raga. Followed by the elaboration of the raga where the artist tries to bring the emotional mood of the raga to the surface and finally the artist erupts into a tarana. The Gwalior style of singing in particular is known for gliding between notes, and these glides are not merely the passing on from one note to another in a text but consist of certain forms based on the pattern chosen for elaboration. Khyal Gatha, produced by the Madhya Pradesh Film Development Corporation, was based on a short story written by Nirmal Verma. The use of architectural spaces, classical dance forms, and khyal music transformed the narrative style of the film. We also see Ustad Zia Mohiuddin Dagar playing the rudra veena and Pandit Birju Maharaj doing kathak in the film. In the film, a music student played by Rajat Kapoor listens to stories about the origins of khayal music. The characters of those legends are re-enacted by Rajat Kapoor, Mangal Dhillon, and Mita Vashishtha. It won the FIPRESCI Prize at the prestigious Rotterdam Film Festival in 1989.
For Kasba, based on Anton Chekov’s novella ‘In the Gully’, Kumar moved to a new landscape: The hills. It is probably the only film that shows the beautiful wall paintings in pahari houses. The film tells the story of a woman asserting her agency, highlighting tensions in patriarchal society. It is set in the family of a wealthy businessman and patriarch Mani Ram, which includes his two sons and Tejo, his daughter-in-law. The film blurs the line between the outside and the inside. Things go haywire when Dhaniram (Mani Ram’s other son) returns. In this entangled family drama, Tejo’s character boldly asserts her value in a patriarchal setup, while also mimicking unethical ways. Another striking feature of the film is the colour scheme, utilising the colours of the wall paintings and the costumes of the characters to make characters seem like they’re from a folk tale from the hills.