FilmIndia (1940)

FILMINDIA January 1940 After all this, I would like to know whether we have story writers and new stories. It is high time that the producer learns some self-discipline, before he airs his complaints. INDIAN FILMS ON THE A.I.R. The Indian film industry should feel grateful to Mr. Z. A. Bokhari the director of the Bombay radio station for introducing a broadcast review of Indian films once every month. It is a splendid idea to popularise the cinema amongst the listeners and Mr. Bokhari's enterprise demands our congratulations. In selecting Mr. K. Ahmad Abbas to broadcast on this subject, a better choice could not be made as Mr. Abbas is easily one of our very few and able critics who command respect not only from the cine going public but also from the producers. We would however suggest one more programme every month on the general subject of films, to stress their social significance. To make this item interesting some inside dope from the studios may be introduced. We leave the details to Mr. Bokhari who is perhaps a better showman than several of our showmen put together. A THOUGHT PROVOKING LECTURE The following extracts from the lecture delivered by Mr. K. A. Abbas on the subject of "Cash, Culture And Cinema" at the Cultural Conference held at the Blavastsky Lodge in Bombay under the joint auspices of the Bombay Students' Brotherhood and the Muslim Students' Association, are worth a careful reading: Condemning the snobbery of the classes shown towards those working in the Indian film industry, Mr. Abbas said, "That in India this attitude assumes an even more vicious aspect, for inferiority complex is added to snobbery. Many of our intellectuals will talk enthusiastically about foreign films and foreign film personalities but betray rank ignorance when discussing Indian films which, they have arbitrarily decided, must be inferior. It is fashionable these days to praise Russian films even if one has not seen any. I have seen a few and have the greatest admiration for Soviet film artists and technicians but I fail to see consistency in the argument of the friend who while talking ecstatically about "Peter The First," the Russian film recently seen in Bombay, refused to see "Pukar" because it deals with the life of an emperor, Jehangir. In our zeal for socialism we sometimes seem to think that the Russian emperors must necessarily have been better than Indian emperors. This attitude can be directly traced to the general ignorance about Indian culture that Lord Macaulay's system of education has created amongst us, so that some people who know Shakespeare by heart have never heard of Premchand and people who can dance the Polka or the Lambeth Walk don't know whether Kathakali is a dance or a disease. Then there are those who, while free from conventional taboos, still persist in the illusion that Hollywood is the vice centre of the world and that films arc exclusively meant 1 > provide escapist entertainment." "The Cinema can or cannot be developed as a cultural medium and used for social ends as a people's art, as long as these fallacies are removed or persist in our minds. It is necessary, therefore, that the thinking people devote some attention to a study of the elementary facts about the Cinema that determine its course of evolution." PICTURES WITH SOCIAL SIGNIFICANCE Stressing the necessity of avoiding slapstick entertainment which has no practical result in our present day social life, Mr. Abbas said, "That in recent years Hollywood has surprised us by producing an increasing number of films that have definitely transcended the old escapist tradition. Twenty, or even ten, years ago it was inconceivable that commercial studios would send out pictures like "The Life Of Louis PasteUr," "Emile Zola," "Juarez," "Confessions Of A Nazi Spy" and "Good Earth." How has this amazing transformation come about? It has been made possible by that very Box-Office which is generally supposed to be the bane of the Cinema. For, the Cinema is a peculiar art, as it depends not only upon the genius of the artist but also upon the patronage of the public. The painter may paint for himself and the musician play in the wilderness but the Cinema does not exist without an audience." "Not only commercially, but artistically, the public is an essential factor for the coming into being of a motion picture. As William Dieterle, the Director of "Juarez" says, "To think that a work of art can be judged by the amount of money it brings from the BoxOffice is ridiculous. Not how much a picture brings from the Box-Office but how much it gives to the audience should be the measure of its worth." "But at the same time reels of celluloid lying in tins, even if they contain the finest and most artistic shots, have no value — indeed, they do not deserve to be called a motion picture — unless projected on the screen and seen by an audience. Thus of all the arts, the Cinema most directly goes to and is influenced by the general public. That is why I call it peoples' art. Each person who goes to see a picture shares the credit for its creation — and the joy of creation, too! Thus the growing refinement and maturity of public taste and the increasing interest taken by the people in social, political and economic problems must of necessity be reflected in the Cinema. That is how Hollywood, while still producing its traditional charming stupidities, is forced, by an indirect and subtle process, to produce some pictures with deeper themes and more significant social implications." PICK AND CHOOSE YOUR ENTERTAINMENT Pointing out the necessity of discrimination in our choice of entertainment Mr. Abbas continued, "This process can be helped and directed into more progressive channels if the thinking class2S learn to take interest in the Indian film?. Nothing can be more harmful 8