ITINERARY OF PATWARDHAN’S CARRIER AS A DOCUMENTARY MAKER

CONCLUESION: REFLECTIONS ON THE ITINERARY OF PATWARDHAN’S CARRIER AS A DOCUMENTARY MAKER
In India, the early documentary scene was dominated by government propaganda made by the Films Division of India, which produced newsreels and documentaries that were compulsorily shown before every commercial film. People either arrived deliberately late or walked out during these films, and the tag of "boring" became inescapably attached to the documentary. It has taken several decades of sustained independent work to break this tag. Today with the DVD revolution making the means of production accessible, the documentary has come of age, and public interest is rising, encouraged by several attempts by the state (India) to curtail the documentary filmmaker's right to freedom of expression.
The Emergency and its aftermath saw a rise in democratic consciousness and the civil liberties movement gave impetus to several new documentaries. Patawardhan made Prisoners of Conscience, Utpalendu Chakravarty made Mukti Chai, Tapan Bose and Suhasini Mulay made An Indian Story - all films about people and conditions in prison. Later as times changed and new issues were born documentaries about other issues began to be made as well. Video had not yet arrived and we still filmed in 16 mm, an expensive proposition for independents, so the over-all output remained tiny for a long time.
He was involved in anti Vietnam War movement in USA as a student of M.A. in Communications at McGill University. After his return from studies abroad I worked as a volunteer in a rural education and development project in rural Madhya Pradesh. Mostly he did farming and science teaching. Later he joined an anti-corruption student movement in Bihar and ended up making a film called Waves of Revolution. The film and him self went underground in 1975 when a State of Emergency was declared and people were jailed at the slightest sign of protest. But generally filming was far from a priority in those days and was more like a side activity that could be called upon if needed.
Many documentary makers began as armatures there main focus was on activism. They made films to boost up the efforts of social change. Patawardhan says in his interview that they didn’t have the idea of starting an alternative film making tradition. He took it as a serious art in later stages. In fact most of the documentary makers are not trained in film schools but made excellent films of fine artistry. Till today with DV revolution many amateurs have entered the field. This has documentary films highly democratic when compared to feature films.
Virtually all Patawardhan films were driven by political events. He has discovered early the joys of mixing “art" with the desire to speak out about issues he was involved with. In the beginning, he saw filmmaking more in utilitarian terms, as a means towards an end, as a pamphlet that would be more exciting than the usual fare and would overcome the shackles of illiteracy. In time, he began to take more interest and pay more attention to the craft of filmmaking and the ways of storytelling.
With his desire to speak out about issues he discusses a wide ranges of topics which were the chief concerns of modern world. As discussed in the chapter third. Each documentary takes variety of issues ranging from nuclear nationalism to gender issues. Post modern intellectuals have extensively discussed most of these topics. For example post modern feminism now days discussing the concept of gendered nation. Patwardhan’s two documentaries War and Peace; Father Son and Holy war bring out these issues without referring to those academic debates. Vinay Lal in his article travails of nation* says
“Patwardhan’s understanding of patriarchy is not more sophisticated, and the assumption remains that one can write a seamless history of patriarchy – however much it might be dressed up, disguised, deformed, or diluted”.* (Third Text, Vol. 19, Issue 2, March, 2005)
Though one can dispute the authenticity of arguments and depiction of human history from academic point of view it’s faulty to say he lacks the basic understanding of the issues he is dealing with. Later in his article Vinay Lal acknowledges that Patawardhan remains the most sofesticated sensitive documentary maker of India.
“One has the impression that Patwardhan does not always quite think through his theses, nor is he fully aware of the politics and regimes of representation; and yet, in his understanding of the sexual politics of resurgent Hindu communalism, Patwardhan remains India’s most astute and daring documentary film-maker and one of the country’s most sensitive commentators”.
One can’t draw a clear demarcation between the issues discussed in the documentaries like environmental concerns, social concerns, and political debates. Most of these issues are brought in a complex manner but still they are intelligible to a layman. Patawardhan says in his interviews that his chief concern is to communicate the issues to a wide variety of people. So it is clearly evident that Patawardhan doesn’t dilute the complexity of the issue where as he tries to make it more lucid to the common spectators. Visual media has the challenge of walking on a tight rope. The argument has to be well spoken and well established to make its self more concrete.
The real issues of the information gathering and disseminating systems is very crucial in the modern world. Huge news agencies are owned by big medeocrates who are hand in glove with multinational corporate companies of the developed world. They easilly disseminate a totally picture of the wrold to meet their ends As CNN and FOX during the iraq war. Some global forces prevent all of us from seeing some images in the normal course of our lives.Wthought an alternative medium of documentaries Iraq war would have been easily legitimised by these news agencies. Daring documentary makers like Michel Moore has give a more wide view of the war and its illegitemacy.
Gathering information which is not accesible to the common man and disseminating it through an alternative viewpoint seems to to be another important concern of patawardhan’s documentaries. This is evident in all the five documentaries chosen in the this desretation. For instance War and peace provoids information about uranium mining in Bihar is not highlighted in any of media. This is because of legal problems involved with and state sensorship. Medea applies self sensoreship to avoid legal problems. Patawardhan dares to wage a legal batle with the state to bring such information to the general public. He trays to create awareness in a democratic set up and stebilises the democracy.
While doing it he never makes the clime of nutrality. Infact in most of his documentaries he makes his stand clear in the very begening of the films. In war and peace he says his view is of Gandian view. He never pretends to take a nutral stand point. He says
“I do not say that my approach to documentary cinema should be the blueprint for everybody. That would be boring. Let everyone come to the medium with their own preoccupations, their own likes and dislikes and methods of working. As for “manipulation” and subjectivity it is a given no matter what disguise is used to achieve the pretence of neutrality.”
His intention is not to give an ethnographers account of issues. Rather he takes sides to argue in the film Narmada Diary he openly supports the activists’ view who oppose the dam project. He says
“I never wanted to be an ethnographer or an anthropologist. I do of course take sides though I don’t want to do propaganda in as much as I will never consciously exaggerate facts or tell lies”.
While presenting his arguments he is not aggressive or bitterly sarcastic. He not only tries to develop a dialogue even with the people who oppose his views but also allows them to speak out there view in the film. He says as a Gandhian he cannot see individuals as the enemy, but only institutions. In his films he is never present physical and at times uses voice over depending mostly on interviews and naturally shot visuals which impart more credibility and covincing.
Some have occused his film as imperfect since he uses low quality cameras like 16mm, super8 or even hi8 cameras; and gives less thought to artistry. Socially committed documentary has to work in cirtain limitations.
1) Low budget the most limmiting factor.. Patawardhan does the camera work for him self. He says he cant afford a camera man.
2) They may have to work in verycritical conditions where in they cant take bulky cameras( like 35mm
camera) and a big crew for shooting. For instance in places like Jala Samarpan in Narmada Diary its tooo dificult to take a bulky camera and a big crew where director has to shoot interviews of activists who are hiding from police to sacrify there lives for stoppingn the hightening of the dam.
3) For a socially comitted documentary maker its not the aesthetics which matters most, it’s the content and its truthfullness which maters. It cirtainly imports more credibility to film since the goal in no to enchant but to enlighten.
Its opt to end the desertation at this point since it has reaced a very important stage. For committed documentary making its not the philosophical thaught in the frame which is important but it is the content and its effective presentation.
To cote Patawardhan’s own words
“What you see in the frame of my film is not an outcome of some great theoretical thought. If there is any Art, it is nothing conscious. Self-conscious art is more con than art. It’s the integrity of purpose and the passion behind a film that may lead to art at times”.*
There is also a debet about getting a wider range of audience by making documentaries more attractive and by big theatrical releeses. Ptawardhan has made an experiment by releasing War ans Peace in big mutiplexes of Mumbai. What is striking is he was success full in running the show housefull and getting back the finance invested. He is also making efforts to release them in home DVD format to make the films acceesible. There is silver lining because similar experiment yeilded goog result in USA when Michel Moore’s films got good turn out when released theatrically.

There are scopes for future study. Limitation of time and space has left many areas still unexplored. The case study can be extended to include other films are patawardhan which are very important from the perspective of cultural studies. “In Memory of Friends” discusses the use of Bhagat Sings image for communal propaganda by both Sikh separatists of Kalisthan movement and Hindu communal forces in post independence era. In fact a big debate was held about the use of anti theistic passages in the documentary. Doordarshan authorities disagreed to telecast the film by telling it hurts religious sentiments of people. High court of Bombay ordered Doordashan to telecast the film with ought a single cut. All the passages used in the film were extracts from the Book “Why I am an atheist” by Bagath Sing. Court emphasised the freedom of expression guarantied by Indian constitution. It’s very baffling that even after sixty years of independence passages written by Bhagat Sing demand censorship by Indian state media.
An interesting study could be taken up to analyse the demands for cuts by censor board to Patwardhan’s films. It’s more imperative to note none of the demands were accepted by the film maker who waged lengthy legal battles in court to overcome the censorship. Impediments for public screening are another vital area to be explored. Despite winning national awards his films were rejected for public screening by Film Division and Doordarshan. Jang aur Aman ("War and Peace", 2002), at the Mumbai International Film Festival, has been refused a certificate for general screening since Patawardhan has understandably stated his unwillingness to accommodate the censor’s demands for cuts. Indian authorities engineered its removal as the inaugural film of the Kolkata Film Festival in May 2002. Even out side India many screenings received threats of attack. From the point of view of the socially committed documentaries it’s a functional to study the reasons for censorship in a democratic set up which proclaims freedom of expression in a high voice.
Yet another big area of study where one can make a comparison between television news reel versions of facts and committed documentary versions of facts. Most of private and private owned television channels apply self censorship. The spotlight doesn’t fall on the issues which really affect large part of public such as government policies, corporate exploitation, and food crisis effects of nuclear radiations or contamination of ecology. Where as they just hassle around the trivia of every day life. A cause and effect analysis can be done on electronic media giving bits and pieces of selected information on par with committed documentaries giving detailed analysis of the issues
The claim of neutrality by the giant mass media (chiefly visual media) can be cross checked by keeping different versions of the same issues as represented in the alternative media of the committed documentary making. Selection of the visuals and their sequencing may easily create altogether different meaning. For instance patawardhans visuals from Waves of Revolution were used by Doordharshan to retell a different story version of student movement in Bihar during emergency. Patawardhan filed a petition in the court against the use of visuals from his film against the will and spirit of the documentary maker. The court decision is still awaited.
In his short music video “Images You Didn’t see” He shows how the images of Iraq war were misrepresented by CNN and FOX to hide the brutality of war. In some of the visuals stills are edited in such way that world got an impression that the operation Iraqui Freedom was welcomed whole heartedly by Iraqui people. Editing zooming and positioning of the camera involves lot of politics in mass media. Camera can be easily be used to give a predetermined view of the world out side. In this light a study can be made on the use of visuals in committed documentaries (Patwardhan’s films in particular) and use of visuals by national and regional television channels.
Since the area is a vast and unexplored there are many other quarters of study like commercial viability, mode of distribution and there cultural ramifications. The ways in which the reach of committed documentary is restricted deliberately both state and corporate agencies. Different techniques used by documentary makers to overcome these barriers are to be explored.

