एउटा कडा कम्युनिष्ट

यज्ञश

कुनै बेला सफदर हासमीस“ग कुममा कुम जोडेर सडक-नाटक गर्थे । राजनीतिक विकृतिमाथि प्रहार गर्ने नाटककै क्रममा एकदिन सफदर सडकमै मारिए । त्यसपछि भने एनके शर्मा मञ्चका नाटकमै बढी व्यस्त हुनथाले । दिल्लीको राष्ट्रिय नाट्य विद्यालयको प्रांगणमा रहेको एउटा ठूलो निमको रूख यिनको अखडा हो । उनका प्रायः नाटकको छलफल र रिहर्सल यही रूखमुनि हुन्छ । यही रूखको छाया“मा यिनले बिहारी मनोज बाजपेयीलाई अभिनय सिकाएका थिए । एनके शर्मा खा“ट्टी कम्युनिस्ट हुन्, पार्टीी कार्यकर्ता । यसैले यिनीस“ग राजनीतिक संवाद गर्ने मन थियो । यसपटकको नाटक महोत्सवमा अनुप बरालले यिनीस“ग चिनाजानी गराइदिए । नेटवा, जब सहर हमारा सोता है, आओ साथी सपने देखें, मुदोर्ंको गाड दो, प्रेसिडेन्ट र कास्मिर उनका केही चर्चित नाटक हुन् । चार वर्षभयो यिनले सरकारी नाटक महोत्सवमा भाग नलिएको । 'यो फेस्टिबल ठूला सहरका मान्छेका लागि मात्र भएको छ । नाटक छनोट गर्नुअघि यिनी 'कु...हरू' नाटकको सिडी माग्छन् । एउटा सानो बजारको नाटक टोलीले कसरी सिडी पठाउन सक्छ - सिडी माग्न थालेपछि मैले यो महोत्सव बहिस्कार गरेको हु“,' कारण यसरी खुल्यो । गोलाबाट हुरुरुरु निस्किने अरिंगालजस्तो यिनको मुखबाट गाली निस्किन्छ । र, रेलको इन्जिनजसरी धुवा“ पनि निस्किरहन्छ । एउटा चुरोट सकिन नपाउ“दै उनी अर्को सल्काइहाल्छन् । ब्रान्ड हो विल्स् । भेटेको पहिलो दिन मैले यिनलाई उपहारस्वरूप एक खिल्ली नेपाली चुरोट 'टक्रयाएको' थिए“ । भोलिपल्ट अन्तर्वार्ता गरौं सर, भन्दा यिनले भने- 'तेरो नेपालको अर्को पनि चुरोट ख्वा, साले १ एक खिल्लीमा अन्तर्वार्ता हुन्छ -' जब कुरा सुरु भयो, यिनले नाटकका बारेमा मात्र बोलेनन्, गुजरातमा नरेन्द्र मोदीले फेरि जितेकोमा एकपटक खेद व्यक्त गरे, नेपालको राजनीति सही दिशामा जान लागेकामा खुसी व्यक्त गरे र पश्चिम बंगालमा कम्युनिस्टलाई खेदिएकामा आक्रोशित पनि भए । असीजति नाटकको निर्देशन गरिसकेका यिनी प्रायः पुराना नाटक गर्दैनन् । 'अहिलेसम्म जम्मा दुइ पुराना नाटक गरेको छु, बा“की सबै नया“ लेखाउ“छु,' हातमा 'कटिङ चाय' को सानो प्याला लिएका उनले यो गर्वानुभूतिलाई चियाको सर्कोस“गै सुर्क्याए । सधै“ नया“ नाटक किन त - 'नाटकको एउटा सामाजिक भूमिका हुन्छ,' उनको अमूत उत्तर आयो । यसमा म सन्तुष्ट थिइन“ । बुझाइदिन भने“ । अलि चर्को स्वरमा उनले अर्थ्याए, 'कलाकारले के बोलिरहेको छ, के भनिरहेको छ, त्यो हर्ेर्नेले बुभ\mने त हुनुपर्‍यो, मर्ूख । यसका लागि वर्तमानको कुरा हुनुपर्‍यो । वर्तमानमा नै सबैभन्दा बढी दर्शकको प्रतिक्रिया हुन्छ । नाटकले इतिहास पढाउने होइन ।' त्यसो भए के पहिले लेखिएका सबै नाटक जलाइदिए हुन्छ त - यो प्रश्न सुन्नेबित्तिकै उनी भड्किए- 'त“ मलाई चाट्दै छस् कि त“लाई केही आउ“दैन ह“ -' यो धम्कीपछि उनको उत्तर पनि आयो, जुन यस्तो थियो- 'पुराना पनि राम्रा छन्, तर सबै अहिलेको समयस“ग तादात्म्य मिल्ने खालका छैनन् । यदि तेरो नाटक धेरैलाई देखाउनु छ भने कही“ न कही“बाट तिनलाई छुने विषय हुनुपर्छ ।' अहिलेसम्मको विश्व-साहित्यमा सबैभन्दा महान् मानिएका नाटककार सेक्सपियर पनि पुरानो समयका थिए । तर, यी बूढाले त पुरानालाई झुत्रे-झाम्रे नै भन्न थाले । यसैले मैले सेक्सपियरको बाण हाने“ । 'त के गुरुजी सेक्सपियरलाई पनि अब बिदा गरिदिए भयो -' बूढा फेरि झोक्किए- 'महान्को कुनै सीमांकन हु“दैन, त“ भन्न सक्छस् के गर्‍यो भने महान् भइन्छ - महान् कोही हु“दैन, उसको प्रतिभा र काम महान् हुन्छ । सेक्सपियर महान् हो । किनभने उसले चार-पा“च सय वर्षघि लेखेका नाटक अहिले पनि सान्दर्भिक छन् । भन्नेले उनलाई राजारानीका नाटक लेख्ने बर्ुर्जुवा पनि भने । तर, सेक्सपियरका सबै नाटकभित्र जनता छन् ।' बूढाले 'यु र्टन' मारेर सेक्सपियरको उपद्रो गुण गाउन थालेपछि मैले अर्को पासो थापे“- 'के हिन्दीमा वा नेपालीमा लेखेको भए पनि सेक्सपियर उत्तिकै महान् कहलाइन्थे होला -' यसमा उनी पहिलेजस्तो जंगिएनन् बरु हा“से । 'हो, यस धर्तीमा अंग्रेजी साम्राज्यवाद जबर्जस्ती लादिएको छ । तर, सेक्सपियरको साहित्य भाषाभन्दा माथि छ । उनले मेरो हिन्दी वा तेरो नेपालीमा लेखेको भए पनि उत्तिकै महान् हुन्थे । तै“ले मार्खेज र कामुलाई कसको भाषामा पढिस् - तिनले त कहिल्यै अंग्रेजीमा लेखेनन् । तर, त“ तिनको पढ्छस् । यदि कुनै तेरो वा मेरो लेखकले त्यस्तै लेख्यो भने ती पनि पढिनेछन् । मूल कुरा के हो भने त्यो कति 'युनिभर्सल' छ भन्ने हो,' उनले भाषणको अन्त्य गरे । मैले फेरि अर्को खोचें थापे- युनिभर्सल चाहि“ कसरी हुन्छ नि, सर - 'तेरा कुरा जति सूक्ष्म हुन्छन्, ती त्यति नै 'युनिभर्सल' हुन्छन् ।' महान् र युनिभर्सलपछि अब म नाट्यकर्मका विषयमा यी कम्युनिस्टलाई केही प्रश्न गर्न चाहन्थे“ । अनुप बराल हाम्रो छेउमा थिए । घरि-घरि यी बूढा मलाई थर्काइरहन्थे- 'तै“लै देखिस्, यहा“ कति क्यामेरा लिएर घुमिरहेका छन् । ती सबैले मलाई इन्टरभ्यू दे भन्छन् । तर, म दिन्न“ । यो अनुपले भनेको भएर त“स“ग कुरा गरेको ।' उनले अनुपको प्रभावको व्याख्या गरेका हुन् कि आफू कति 'घामड' छु भन्ने जनाएका हुन्, खुलेन । 'नाटकलाई सम्भ्रान्तहरूको कला भनिन्थ्यो । अहिले यो जनताको कला हो कि सम्भ्रान्तकै हो -' यो अलि कडा प्रश्न थियो क्यारे १ 'त“लाई कसले भन्यो, नाटक सम्भ्रँन्तको कला थियो भनेर, दिमागमा यस्ता अन्टसन्ट बोकेर नहि“ड्' यो अर्तिपछि उनी फेरि पड्किए, 'साला १ नाटक कहिल्यै एलिटको थिएन । कलालाई कला मात्र बनाउने चक्करमा यसबाट जीवन गायब हुनथाल्यो, मान्छे गायब हुनथालेका हुन् ।' उनले लामो व्याख्या गरे । कसरी नाटकलाई राजनीतिभन्दा टाढाको विषय भनेर 'घटिया राजनीति' सुरु गरियो, किन बलिउडको फैलावटले नाटकलाई फरक पर्दैन आदि । 'नाटक सधैं राजनीतिक हुन्छ । तर, नाटक राजनीतिक हुनु हु“दैन भनेर भारतमा नाटकको राजनीति गरियो । बलिउड 'मास आर्ट' हो । यो व्यापारिक कला हो, नाटक सांस्कृतिक ।' यिनले अभिनय सिकाएका पा“च सयजति कलाकार अहिले बलिउडमा छन् । कोही स्टार बनिसके, कोही संर्घष्ा गर्दै छन् । कति त, बम्बैबाट फर्किएर उनीस“ग बिदा मागेर गाउ“ नै फर्किसके । उनलाई मैले सोधें- सिकेर अभिनय हुन्छ कि त्यो आपै+mभित्र हुनर्ुपर्छ - 'सबैभन्दा ठूलो कुरा जीवन हो । नाटकका लागि जीवन होइन, जीवनका लागि नाटक हो । तै“ले बा“च्न सकिस् भने, अभिनय आप\m-से-आप\m आउ“छ,' काला दा“त, सेतै फुलेका पातला दारी र वजनदार आवाज भएका यी जीवन्त मान्छेले भने- 'खुल्के, बिन्दास जिओ, तब मजा आएगा जिनेका ।' अब सा“च्चिकै नाटकको राजनीतिकरणका विषयमा कुरा सुरु भयो । उनले सुरुमै भने- 'जसरी अमिर-गरिब भगवान्ले बनाउने होइन भनेर अझै बुझाउन सकिएको छैन, यसैगरी नाटक पनि सत्ताको साधन बन्छ भनेर हामीले बुभ\mन सकेका छैनौं ।' दक्षिण एसियाली नाटकले राजनीतिलाई कसरी प्रभावित पारिरहेका छन् त - यस प्रश्नमा उनले लेख्न नमिल्ने, सालेभन्दा अलि कडा गालीबाट कुुराको सुरुवात गरे । 'स्थिति एकदमै खराब छ, विश्वव्यापीकरणका नाममा अहिले पूरै दुनिया“लाई अमेरिकाको चंगुलमा हाल्न खोजि“दै छ ।' नाटक र नाटककारले किन यसका विरुद्ध आवाज उठाउ“दैनन् त - उनले भने, 'मुला, नाटकबाट दुनिया“ परिवर्तन हुन्छ - हुन्थ्यो भने पूरै अमेरिका हलिउड भइसक्नुपर्ने । हामीले त केवल खबरदार गर्न सक्छौं, आदेश दिन सक्दैनौं । तेरो काम पनि त्यस्तै हो । त“ पनि कसैले खराब गर्दै छ भने, त्यसको सूचना दिन सक्छस्, त्यसलाई रोक्नु तेरो बसको कुरा होइन,' उनले सूक्ति वचनमा पनि बीच-बीचमा गाली घुसाइरहे र एउटा गम्भीर फैसला सुनाए- 'राजनीतिले नाटकलाई परिवर्तन गर्छ ।' अब मलाई नाटकको कुरा पुग्यो भन्ने लागिसकेको थियो । यसैले म यिनलाई राजनीतिको बाटोमा घिच्याउन चाहन्थे“ । मैले नेपालको वर्तमान राजनीतिक स्थिति र भारतीय दृष्टिकोणका बारेमा सोधे“ । 'नेपाल सकारात्मक दिशामा जा“दै छ, तर केही अतिवादीका कारण अलि कष्ट पनि आउन सक्छ,' आप\mनो दृष्टिकोण उनले राखे । मैले जान्न चाहे“- यस्ता अतिवादी त्रि्रै देशमा लुकेर नेपालमा वितण्डा मच्चाउन खोज्दै छन् रे नि १ उनी अलि उदास देखिए, 'हो, मैले पनि त्यस्तो सुनेको छु, खासगरी धर्मका नाममा यस्तो केही हु“दै छ भन्ने । जबदेखि धर्मका कुरा राजनीतिमा जोडियो, कुरो त्यही“बाट बिग्रिएको हो । धर्म भनेको मानिसको नितान्त निजी कुरो हो, सेक्सजस्तै । तर, पापीहरू धर्मका नाममा राजनीति गरिरहेका छन् ।' यही मेसोमा हालैको गुजरातको चुनाव र हिन्दूवादी मुख्यमन्त्री नरेन्द्र मोदीको विषय पनि उठ्यो । 'मोदी कुनै ठूलो कुरा होइन,' कसै गर्दा हराउन नसकेका मोदीलाई उनले केही होइन भने, 'मेधा पाटकर र आमिर खानजस्ताले मोदीलाई ठूलो बनाइदिए ।' लौ, यी बूढा त उल्टो बाटोमा हि“ड्न थाले बा १ 'कसरी -' मैले व्यग्र भएर सोधे“ । 'एनजिओले देश परिवर्तन हुन्छ कही“ - मेधा र आमिरले एनजिओ संस्कृतिलाई बढावा दिए,' उनले अर्को फैसला सुनाए- 'एनजिओ साम्राज्यवादीले निकै विचार पुर्‍याएर सुरु गरेको अभियान हो ।'

A Soap Opera of Nepal

A Soap Opera Dealing With Discrimination Brings a Message of Change to Rural Nepal

When the power cuts that frequently plague Nepal were at their worst this winter, one of the biggest frustrations for many people was missing their favorite television soap opera.

Every Sunday night for a year, entire villages across the country have gathered around a single television for the latest installment of “Dalan,” or “Exploitation,” a historical saga set in Nepal’s rural west.

In a nation more attuned to the noisy glamour of Bollywood movies from neighboring India, the popularity of the slow-paced serial about a family of Dalits — the lowest social caste — has taken everyone by surprise, not least its makers.

“Dalan” is a very simple show and we really didn’t expect it to be the huge success it has become,” said producer Purna Singh Baraily of the soap, which has fans as far away as Dubai, Hong Kong and the United States, where it is shown via satellite.

“The fans say they love the characters and the fact that the show deals with its subject matter realistically,” said Baraily, himself a member of the caste once known as “untouchables.”

“I have had people say to me that they don’t feel like they are watching a television program, they feel like they are there.”

Baraily wanted to make a show that would highlight the problems facing Dalits in Hindu-majority Nepal, where being born into a low caste is still a huge disadvantage. Discrimination against Dalits, who make up around 13 percent of Nepal’s population, was outlawed in the 1960s. But the tradition of “untouchability” survives, particularly in rural areas, where Dalits are frequently banned from entering temples or drinking from communal wells. Even in the capital Kathmandu, they are often unable to find accommodation, with some landlords refusing to rent to people with Dalit names.

Baraily initially won a $50,000 grant from the European Union to shoot a documentary, but opted instead to make a soap opera, believing its message would be more likely to reach the rural communities where Dalits suffer most. He persuaded a well-known Dalit poet to write the script and the result was a drama that follows three generations of Dalits and the changing attitudes toward them.

Shooting began at the height of the Maoist insurgency in 2003, posing huge problems for the production team, who faced suspicion from both sides in Nepal’s decade-long civil war.

“The Maoists were convinced we were spying for the army. And because of the subject matter, the army thought we must be on the side of the Maoists,” said Nabin Subba, the show’s director.

To make things even more difficult, “Dalan” was shot mainly on location in a remote village with no electricity and no road access during the monsoon months. The show’s cast ran into the hundreds and many of the actors had no experience, having been recruited from local villages to keep costs down.

Even once shooting was over, Baraily and Subba faced scepticism from national broadcaster NTV, which didn’t think viewers would want to watch a show about Dalits. A year later, their simple tale of a high-caste Brahmin who is rejected by his community after falling in love with a Dalit woman has proved a hit, and won a nomination for Britain’s prestigious One World Media Awards.

Although Nepal does not measure viewing figures, the show appears regularly in the local papers and has an army of loyal fans who have been spurred into action by the drama.

Subba tells how fans in one town near Kathmandu launched a successful campaign to have Dalits allowed into local tea shops whose owners had previously insisted they remain outside.

“Dalan” broadcast its final episode on Sunday, but its makers are planning a series of reruns so viewers can watch the shows they missed during the power outages, and are even considering a feature film. Subba says they plan to organize a meeting of the 400 fan clubs that “Dalan” has spawned to decide how to keep the momentum going.

“We came to the conclusion through the show that Dalit problems can only be solved by Dalits,” he says. “Dalit people have to become politically active.” 

June 30, 2009

AFP

Do Film Critics Know Anything?

RICHARD CORLISS

I sprinted down the corridors of TIME this afternoon, eager to spread the news of the New York Film Critics Circle voting for the year's best films. The winner, in the film, director, screenplay and supporting actor categories? The Coen brothers' No Country for Old Men, which three different people told me they'd been meaning to see. The runner-up, with wins for best actor and cinematographer? There Will Be Blood, an audience-punishing epic that doesn't open for another two weeks. Best actress? Julie Christie, in Away From Her, which earned less than $5 million in its North American release.

I didn't even tell them that the very popular, and very good, Pixar cartoon Ratatouille lost out to a French movie about the troubles in Iran. (Though Persepolis, take my word for it, is funny.) By the time I'd got back to my office I had realized that we critics may give these awards to the winners, but we give them for ourselves. In fact, we're essentially passing notes to one another, admiring our connoisseurship at the risk of ignoring the vast audience that sees movies and the smaller one that reads us.
In the past five days, five groups — the National Board of Review, the Boston Society of Film Critics, the Los Angeles Film Critics Association, the Washington. D.C. Film Critics Association and my crowd, the New Yorkers — have convened to choose the most notable movies and moviemakers. No Country was named best picture in four of the groups, There Will Be Blood in L.A. George Clooney won two best actor awards for playing a lawyer at crisis point in Michael Clayton; Daniel Day-Lewis a pair for his oil mogul in There Will Be Blood; and, in Boston, Frank Langella won the prize for playing an aged novelist in Starting Out in the Evening. Three groups selected Julie Christie as best actress — she's an Alzheimer's patient in the Canadian film Away From Her — and two liked Marion Cotillard as Edith Piaf in La Vie en rose.
You will be forgiven if, like my friends at TIME, you are scratching your head and feigning interest, hoping I'll get quickly to the sexy stuff, like best non-fiction feature (the Iraq docs No End in Sight and Body of War and Michael Moore's Sicko) and distinguished achievement in production design (Jack Fisk, There Will Be Blood, L.A.) . Gee, you're wondering, did The Diving Bell and the Butterfly, the French story of a man totally immobilized by a stroke, beat out the German spy drama The Lives of Others? (Three out of five critics groups say yes.) If you're getting restless, movie lovers, too bad. You'll be hearing the same obscure names at the Golden Globes and on Oscar night.
In animation, Ratatouille won the award outright in Washington and from the National Board of Review. Boston gave the Pixar film a screenplay award, which rarely goes to a cartoon. But in L.A. it shared the L.A. prize with Persepolis, the biographic cartoon from the Iranian exile Marjane Satrapi. And the New York critics rebuffed Ratatouille — and The Simpsons Movie and Bee Movie and Beowulfand other ani-movies people have actually seen — with a first-ballot vote for Persepolis. An art-house film beat out movies that have already grossed nearly $1.5 billion dollars (or about 47 euros) worldwide.
That's the deal with critics' awards. They give prizes to whom they damn well please. No problem with that; it's their gig, and obviously they should pick their favorites. (The choices are fine with me: No Country, Persepolis and No End in Sight are all on my 10 best.) But these laurels factor into publicity campaigns for the Oscars and Golden Globes; often they are the campaigns. It's the way we critics contribute to the art-industrial complex. Our prizes certainly help determine which films get nominated, setting in motion the next round of ballyhoo before the final prizes are handed out. So almost all the nominees will be from worthy obscurities that can't draw much of an audience in the theater or, when the awards shows are aired, on TV.
You might think the highest-rated Oscar telecasts are in years when there's a close contest in the major categories, as with Crash and Brokeback Mountain two years. Nuh-uh. It's the runaway years, when billion-dollar blockbusters like Titanic and The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King get what are essentially People's Choice awards, and its makers wear a path in the rug from their seats to the stage. Moviegoers who are TV viewers don't want horse races; they want coronations — validations that somebody in Hollywood is ready to honor the movies they love.
That won't happen this year. If the Oscars follow the critics' prizes, there won't be a hit film among them — not even the hits that reviewers loved. Disney's megahit comedy Enchanted has the highest rating on Rotten Tomatoes, the critics' polling site, but I barely heard the film mentioned at the New York voting today. Dozens of scribes raved about the smash comedies Knocked Up and Superbad, but neither film has won a critics' prize. The comedy they love now is Juno, which came out last week.
Actually, it's hard to tell which if any of the critical faves will be popular, because most of the big winners (Diving Bell, No Country, Persepolis, Starting Out in the Evening, Sweeney Todd, There Will Be Blood) are November or December releases. Half of them haven't hit the commercial theaters yet. Maybe the critical establishment has A.D.D.
But the Golden Globes and the Oscars, if they follow the critics' lead, will have V.D.D. — viewer deficit disorder. Large numbers of people won't watch shows paying tribute to movies they haven't seen. In the old Golden Age days, most contenders for the top Oscars were popular movies that had a little art. Now they're art films that have a little, very little, popularity. The serious movies Hollywood gives awards to in January and February are precisely the kind it avoids making for most of the year. The Oscars are largely an affirmative action program, where the industry scratches its niche. The show is a conscience soother, but not a crowd pleaser.
And it all starts here, with critics fighting over which hardly seen movie they want to call the best of the year.

PoliticiansattaHipHopParty