Class 10th English : प्रिय विद्यार्थियों, “Mindbloom Study” (#1 Online Study Portal) आपके लिए लाया है Class 10th English Chapter 4 “What Is Wrong With Indian Films” by Satyajit Ray का हिंदी अनुवाद, Summary, Objective And Subjective Questions
INTRODUCTION
SATYAJIT RAY born on May 2 1921 was a well known film director of India. He earned international recognition for his talent in film-making and direction. Best known for his ‘Pather Panchali, ‘Aparajto’, ‘Charulata’ and ‘Shatranj Ke Khilari’, he won awards at international film festivals in Venice, Cannes and Berlin. Ray used to compose music for his own films. He was also a story writer, illustrator and book designer. Oxford University conferred on him an honorary Doctorate degree, an honour which very few people have received. In the present essay, taken from his book Our Films, Their Films, he examines the nature of our films and points out their defects. He is extremely critical of the quality of our film-making, direction as well as content…
WHAT IS WRONG WITH INDIAN FILMS
One of the most significant phenomena of our time has been the development of the cinema from a-turn-of the-century mechanical toy into the century’s most potent and versatile art form.
Today, the cinema commands the respect accorded to any other form of creative expression. It combines in various measures the functions of poetry, music, painting, drama, architecture and a host of other arts, major and minor. It also combines the cold logic of science.
India took up film production surprisingly early. The first short was produced in 1907 and the first feature in 1913. By the twenties it had reached the status of big business.
It is easy to tell the world that film production in India is quantitatively second only to Hollywood; for that is a statistical fact. But can the same be said of its quality? Why are our films not shown abroad. Is it solely because India offers a potential market for her own products? Or are we just plain ashamed of our film?
To anyone familiar with the relative standards of the best foreign and Indian films, the answers must come easily. Let us face the truth. There has yet been no Indian film, which could be acclaimed on all counts. Where other countries have achieved, we have only attempted and that too not always with honesty.
No doubt this lack of maturity can be attributed to several factors. The producers will tell you about that mysterious entity ‘the mass’, which goes in for this sort of ‘thing’, the technicians will blame the tools and the director will have much to say about the wonderful things he had in mind but could not achieve because of ‘the conditions’.
In India it would seem that the fundamental concept of a coherent dramatic pattern existing in time was generally misunderstood.
Often by a queer process of reasoning, movement was equated with action and action with melodrama. The analogy with music failed in our case because Indian music is largely improvisational.
Almost every passing phase of the American cinema has had its repercussion on the Indian film. Stories have been written based on Hollywood successes and the cliches preserved with care. Even where the story has been a genuinely Indian one, the background music has revealed an irrepressible penchant for the jazz idiom.
It should be realised that the average American film is a bad model, if only because it depicts a way of life so utterly at variance with our own. Moreover, the high technical polish, which is the hallmark of the standard Hollywood product, would be impossible to achieve under existing Indian Conditions. What the Indian cinema needs today is not more gloss, but more imagination, more integrity, and a more intelligent appreciation of the limitations of the medium.
After all we do posses the primary tools of filmmaking. The complaint of the technicians not withstanding, mechanical devices such as the crane shot and the process shot are useful, but by no means ely indispensable. In fact, what tools we have been used on occasion with real intelligence. What our cinema needs above everything else is a style, an idiom, a sort of iconography of cinema, which would be uniquely and recognisably Indian.
The majority of our films are replete with such ‘visual dissonances’. But the truly Indian film should steer clear of such inconsistencies and look for its material in the more basic aspects of Indian life, where habit and speech, dress and manners, background and foreground, blend into a harmonious whole.
It is only in a drastic simplification of style and content that hope for the Indian cinema resides. At present, it would appear that nearly all the prevailing practices go against such as simplification.
Starting a production without adequate planning, sometimes even without a shooting script, penchant for convolutions of plot and counter plot rather than the strong, simple unidirectional narrative: the practice of sandwiching musical numbers in the most unlyrical situations, the habit of shooting indoors in a country which is all landscape, and at a time when all other countries are turning to the documentary for inspiration – all these stand in the way of the evolution of a distinctive style.
There have been rare glimpses of an enlightened approach in a handful of recent films. IPTA’s Dharti-ke-Lal is an instance of a strong simple theme put over with style, honesty and technical competence. Shankar’s Kalpana, an inimitable and highly individual experiment shows a grasp of filmic movement, and a respect for tradition.
The raw material of the cinema is life itself. It is incredible that a country which has inspired so much painting and music and poetry should fail to move the film maker. He has only to keep his eyes open, and his ears. Let him do so.
MAIN POINT FOR EXAMINATION
• Satyajit Ray was born on May 2, 1921.
• Satyajit Ray was a well known film director of India.
• Satyajit Ray earned international recognition for his talent in film-making and direction.
• Satyajit Ray is best known for his film Pather Panchali, Aparajto, Charulata and Shatranj Ke Khilari.
• Oxford University conferred on him an honorary doctorate degree, an honour which very few people have received.
• ‘What Is Wrong With Indian Films’ is taken from Our Films, Their Films.
• In this essay Satyajit Ray examines the nature of our films and points out their defects.
ANSWER QUESTIONS
B.2.1. Complete the following sentences on the basis of the unit you have studied:
1. Stories have been written …based… on Hollywood Success.
2. It should be realised that the average American film is a bad …model…
3. After all, we do ..posses… the primary tools of film making.
4. The …replete… of our films are replete ‘visual dissonances’.
5. But the truly Indian film should …steer… clear of such inconsistencies.
6. There …have been… rare glimpses of an enlightened approach in a handful of recent films.
Q1) Which is the most potent and versatile art form? (सबसे सशक्त और बहुमुखी कला रूप कौन सा है?)
Answer :– Cinema is the most potent and versatile art form. (सिनेमा सबसे सशक्त और बहुमुखी कला रूप है।)
Q2) Were Indian films shown abroad a few decades ago? (क्या कुछ दशक पहले भारतीय फिल्में विदेशों में दिखाई जाती थीं?)
Answer :– No, Indian films were not shown abroad a few decades ago. (नहीं, कुछ दशक पहले भारतीय फिल्में विदेशों में नहीं दिखाई जाती थीं।)
Q3) When was the first short produced? (पहली लघु फिल्म का निर्माण कब किया गया था?)
Answer :– The first short was produced in 1907. (पहली लघु फिल्म का निर्माण 1907 में किया गया था।)
Q4) Have average American films been a bad modal? Give one reason. (क्या औसत अमेरिकी फिल्में खराब मॉडल रही हैं? एक कारण बताओ।)
Answer :– Yes, the average American films have been a bad model because their life doesn’t match to our life. (हां, औसत अमेरिकी फिल्में एक खराब मॉडल रही हैं क्योंकि उनका जीवन हमारे जीवन से मेल नहीं खाता है।)
Q5) Do Indian films makers possess the primary tools of film making? (क्या भारतीय फिल्म निर्माताओं के पास फिल्म निर्माण के प्राथमिक उपकरण हैं?)
Answer :– Yes, Indian film makers possess the primary tools of film making. (हां, भारतीय फिल्म निर्माताओं के पास फिल्म निर्माण के प्राथमिक उपकरण हैं।)
Q6) What is the most dominant influence on the Indian films? (भारतीय फिल्मों पर सबसे अधिक प्रभाव किसका है?) (2015)
Answer :– The technique of film production in Hollywood is the most dominant influence on Indian films. Stories based on successful Hollywood films are written and the clichés are preserved with care. Almost every passing phase of the American cinema has its effect in India. Even, if the story is Indian, the background music quite often happens to be American. (हॉलीवुड में फिल्म निर्माण की तकनीक का भारतीय फिल्मों पर सबसे अधिक प्रभाव है। सफल हॉलीवुड फिल्मों पर आधारित कहानियाँ लिखी जाती हैं और घिसी-पिटी कहानियों को सावधानी से संरक्षित किया जाता है। अमेरिकी सिनेमा के लगभग हर गुजरते दौर का असर भारत पर पड़ता है। भले ही कहानी भारतीय हो, पृष्ठभूमि संगीत अक्सर अमेरिकी होता है।)
Q7) Should cinema be looked upon as a form of creative expression? Give reasons. (क्या सिनेमा को रचनात्मक अभिव्यक्ति के रूप में देखा जाना चाहिए? कारण दे।)
Answer :– Cinema is a powerful media of communication. It has the power of bringing change in the society and can create an atmosphere for the betterment of the country. There is no doubt that cinema is a form of creative expression. There is creativity in all the different aspects of the film production. For example in writing the story for the film, the dialogue, the acting, the cinematography, the designing of set, editing, direction etc. (सिनेमा संचार का एक सशक्त माध्यम है। इसमें समाज में बदलाव लाने की ताकत है और देश की भलाई के लिए माहौल तैयार किया जा सकता है। इसमें कोई संदेह नहीं कि सिनेमा रचनात्मक अभिव्यक्ति का एक रूप है। फिल्म निर्माण के सभी विभिन्न पहलुओं में रचनात्मकता है। उदाहरण के लिए फिल्म की कहानी लिखना, संवाद, अभिनय, छायांकन, सेट की डिजाइनिंग, संपादन, निर्देशन आदि।)
– : The End : –