To mark Adoor Gopalakrishnan’s 84th birthday, this five-part series by Professor V Vijayakumar revisits the arc of his filmmaking—from the quiet ruptures of early works like Swayamvaram and Kodiyettam to the stark allegories of Elipathayam, Mukhamukham, and later adaptations such as Vidheyan and Nalu Pennungal. Across these essays, Adoor’s cinema is read as a sustained inquiry into time, memory, and the moral weight of history. This opening piece explores how his first two films diagnosed the crises of agency and transition in a society caught between the remnants of feudalism and the illusions of modernity.
Adoor Gopalakrishnan undoubtedly emerges as the most accomplished cinematic virtuoso in the realm of Malayalam filmmaking. This sentiment is widely shared, rooted in the acknowledgment of the innovative dimensions he has introduced to the expression and realization of Malayalam cinema. The cinematic techniques employed in his films commands universal respect. However, even admirers of the technical facets of Adoor’s work have discerned a negative political undercurrent within. Yet, this prodigious talent warrants appreciation not only for its technical brilliance but also for the remarkable insight and social awareness evident in Adoor’s filmography. His early works, marked by a luminous display of talent and dedication, were founded on narratives and screenplays of his own creation. These films were made without even relying on someone else’s story. This was something that even Satyajit Ray could not claim. Adoor crafted films that bore his unique perspective, a conscious effort to carve out a distinct place in the cinematic landscape. The initial quintet – Swayamvaram, Kodiyettam, Elipatthayam, Mukhamukham, and Anantaram – are the journeys towards childhood and youth of our filmmaker. These films symbolize a profound artistic odyssey through the spirit and totality of Kerala society. Adoor presented a distinctive interpretation of his life experiences and perspectives within the temporal and spatial confines of Kerala.
In his portrayal of the common people of Kerala, particularly those from the socio-economic underbelly, and the introduction of characters from the countryside, Adoor astutely encapsulated the quintessence of ‘Keralaness‘. Originality prevailed, surpassing the self-renewal or self-defilement observed among the country gentlemen. Adoor observed their boastful demeanor with a discerning smile, incorporating such nuances into his art of expression. Through characters resistant to renewal, he uncovered the enduring facets of the old Kerala identity, masterfully conveying the simultaneous dynamics of movement and stillness within Kerala society through his cinematic oeuvre.
The backdrop of ‘Swayamvaram‘ (One’s Own Choice) is the 1970s, a period where the vigor of Kerala’s progressive forces, stemming from the renaissance, national, communist, and farmers’ and workers’ movements, had waned. Slowly the democratic public sphere that was being formed here, however small, is becoming exhausted. Concurrently, alongside pervasive poverty, unemployment was afflicting Kerala society, predominantly impacting the lower middle class. Against this canvas, the film uniquely interprets the challenges faced by Kerala, narrating the story of a young couple thwarted by social conditions that stifle their progressive aspirations, leading them to destitution. The narrative subtly communicates the closing avenues of progress and the transformation of Kerala into a society inhibiting creativity, predominantly through the lives of young couples.
This film is the life of a woman who married herself (Swayamvaram – marriage according to self-interests), the life of a liberty pursuer. It encapsulates the aspirations of individuals desiring independent living free from societal constraints. Sita’s and Vishwam’s origins are vaguely alluded to, coming from the north. For those in the south, they came from the north. Kalyani’s question is answered by Sita that “north of Kochi”. However, one thing certain about Sita and Vishwam is their shared desire to live united by mutual love, prompting them to leave and step down together. What is evident is their desire to forge a life together based on mutual love, prompting their migration. Their modern values are viewed with suspicion and disdain by a society lacking the strength to embrace love as a transformative force. The society outside views their ideal of life with suspicion and contempt – a society too weak to embrace the vision of a life elevated by the triumph of love. It is this weakness of the society that uproots Sita and Vishwam from their hometown. There is no difference in the situation where they reach. Adoor paints a good picture of a society that always keeps a suspicious eye on male-female relationships. The three drunkards who come inside the house at night and ask ‘hasn’t the girl been abducted’, the policeman who asks ‘is smuggler Vasu in there’ on a night when Sita and the child are alone at home, and the smuggler Vasu who stands on the street outside their rented house and watches Sita’s movements secretly, the society’s skepticism and attitude towards women is evident. An undemocratic society has a lot to do in making one look with great curiosity and suspicion into the personal lives of others, and the exercise of the policeman’s power shows that the apparatus of the state itself has not been taught even the rudiments of democratic values. Insecurity leading to worry and fear haunts Sita and Vishwa – a state of affairs that makes even those who set out in search of the world of freedom test themselves. Vishwam has to ask Sita if she ‘feel it wasn’t necessary’. Vishwam and Sita, who arrived in the city, could not stay in the hotel paying a high rent for a long time, due to financial constraints. After some days they have to move to a lodge with low rent. However, the experiences that awaited Sita there were unbearable. “We have to move from here.” She has to tell Vishwam that it is not good to stay. Our public places and spaces are frightening for women. This shows the poor condition of the democratic public sphere. The film contained hints that a decade later, the populace, which had shown its patriotism by bringing a communist government to power, was still far removed from the ideals of a democratic society.
Swayamvaram is a poignant portrayal of Sita and Vishwam, bound by love as they embark on married life. The focal character is Sita, a self-married woman thrust into an orphaned state, paralleling Valmiki’s epic heroine, Sita. The film elucidates Sita’s tumultuous life, highlighting the crises faced by women with progressive aspirations. Towards the end of the film, the camera pans several times to the calendar image of Sita-Swayamvaram. The director tries to bring to our attention through Sita-Swayamvaram, that the film is about the troubled life of the female protagonist and the crisis that women’s progressive aspirations reach. Adoor skillfully depicts the challenges encountered by women in the social milieu of Kerala during that era. The young couple persists in adhering to traditional practices within the confines of their rented home. Despite having small facilities, Sita assumes the entirety of household responsibilities. Vishwam, even when unemployed and idle at home, is not depicted assisting Sita with any domestic tasks. Notably, even during her pregnancy, Sita continues to manage all household chores herself. The director, while portraying Sita searching for employment amid her husband’s helplessness, never showcases Vishwam contributing to household responsibilities. Janakiamma becomes Sita’s sole helper, driven solely by love for Sita, highlighting the absence of such support in typical relationships between men and women. Noteworthy exceptions include Vishwa’s affection for Kanakkapilla in the wood shop and Kanakkapilla who tells Sita, after Vishwam’s death, that she may come and live in his house. Kalyani’s life further underscores the power-hungry and irresponsible nature prevalent in our masculine world. Existing as the concubine of the smuggler Vasu, she faces the economic exploitation of her earnings by her husband, who at times exerts significant control over her. In contrast, Vishwam, grappling with crises and succumbing to illness, and Sita, resolute in raising their child with self-courage gained through endurance, serve as conduits to Adoor’s worldview. The portrayal of the fragile, vulnerable male on the brink of collapse is a recurring theme in many of Adoor’s early films, most notably in ‘Elipaththayam‘ and ‘Mukhamukham.’
The protagonist’s life (in the 1960s) encapsulates the creative minds of that era, evident in his aspirations to become a writer. Despite publishing some stories in magazines and attempting to write a novel, his efforts to publish it proven futile. This leads him to take on roles as a teacher in a tutorial college and later as an accountant in a wood shop. The camera delves into the torn pages of his unpublished novel ‘Nirvrithi‘ after Vishwam’s death. At a micro level, the film critiques the social conditions that either stifle creativity or, in some instances, lead to its demise. The narrative sheds light on the challenges faced by those seeking to express them creatively within a societal framework that may not always support such endeavors, ultimately exploring the impact of these conditions on the individual’s artistic pursuits and well-being. The characterization of Vishwam in Swayamvaram reflects the harsh reality of the time. However, it is essential to note that the characterization of the protagonist transcends that particular period. Vishwam symbolizes a society where creativity succumbs to compromises, the status quo, or mediocrity. It becomes evident that he is complicit in his own helplessness, realizing that the pursuit of a life he desires comes with sacrifices. Despite his initial optimism, he discovers the overlooked aspects of life as he attempts to break free. Vishwam is portrayed as a person aware that his job was available due to someone else’s dismissal, and he becomes desperate to safeguard his position. His compassion for a fellow worker facing unfair dismissal fades quickly, and he resorts to making excuses, mirroring a society reluctant to confront underlying issues and opting for compromises to ensure survival. His life circumstances serve as the driving force behind this behavior. In a historical context, the creation of a character like Vishwam aligns with a period when the progressive political forces in Kerala had abandoned their initial aspirations, steering towards compromises. The 1970s in Kerala witnessed fervent desires for change, symbolized by loud thunders, but these aspirations were swiftly subdued and assimilated into the prevailing status quo. The latter is a time of helplessness in creativity and subjugation to this state. A society devoid of values and creativity has become entrenched in consumerism, apoliticism and a self-splitting middle-class consciousness. Did Adoor’s genius foresee the creative crisis that the Kerala society was going to face through the Viswam of Swayamvaram?
Adoor has written about the film Subarnarekha, directed by Ritvik Ghatak, which he saw during his studies at the Film Institute and how it impressed him and other students. The heroine of Subarnarekha is also named Sita. Eshwar Chakraborty, the eldest brother, was brought up her with great love. He also takes care of Abhiram, an orphaned street boy. They go to the village on the banks of the Subarnarekha river after being hired as clerks in a friend’s factory. Sita is studying music here. She sings well. Abhiram goes out and gets educated and passes the exams. Ishwar wants him to be sent to Germany to get engineering education. Abhiram, on the other hand, wants to become a writer. He has written a novel. It should be published. Abhiram and Sita are close. Abhiram wants to marry Sita. Meanwhile, Ishwar Chakraborty is promoted to the manager of the factory. During a visit to his industrialist friend, Abhiram inquires what caste he belongs to. Ishwar’s uneasiness increases when Abhiram reveals that the lower caste woman who dies at the railway station near the Golden Line is his mother. Ishwar asks Abhiram to go to Germany as soon as possible to avoid him. The brother arranges another marriage for Sita. However, on the night of the fixed marriage, Sita goes to Calcutta with Abhiram. Ghatak’s film does not tell anything about the six or seven years of Sita and Ram’s life in Calcutta. Adoor writes that anxieties about their early days in the city may have been the inspiration for the theme of the film Swayamvaram. Seetha and Vishwam have some similarities to the Subarnarekha heroines. Vishwa and Abhiram want to become writers, they failed. In Ghatak’s Sita you could b find a determined woman. When her elder brother, who is dear to her, moves contrary to her and Abhiram’s interests, she shows strength to say that it is unfair and leave with her lover. Adoor’s Sita is also the one who went down with her lover. After the death of her husband, she shows the strength to face life even when she is stuck in that road, Adoor’s film ends with a picture of mother Sita preparing milk for her baby. The unemployment of academics and the problematic conditions facing the creativity and imagination of the youth were the reality of every Indian city. Ghatak’s famous film may have been the initial inspiration for Adoor’s first film, but the exposure to Kerala reality and the backdrop of Kerala life made it a very different film. Adoor’s views and beliefs about Keralite society and Keralite people were conducive to creating a film with different dimensions. It should also be said that the very obvious differences between the tragic life of Ghatak’s heroine and the dilemmas that Adoor’s heroine reaches are the creation of some firm beliefs of Adoor about Kerala womanhood. Adoor’s female characters, from Kalyani in Swayamvaram to mother in Kathapurushan and Pankiyamma in Oru Pennum Randanum, exhibit remarkable strength, patience, and determination.
With his second film Kodiyetam (Ascent), Adoor tried to relive his teenage life in Kerala. In Sankarankutty in Kodiyetam we can find an immature adolescent, teen like, though not a teen by age. The director makes us suspect that he is a dullard; at least in some instants. However, Sankarankutty doesn’t display the stubbornness or quick-tempered nature typically associated with mental disabilities; rather, he is exceedingly humble, aware of his limitations, and behaves accordingly. He tends to withdraw from those who mock or patronize him, becoming a subject of amusement for many. While he lacks the strength to resist and prevail, his small objections are futile and result in considerable ridicule. Sankarankutty experiences a sense of freedom when devoid of duties or responsibilities. He is free as long as he has no duties or responsibilities. Sankarankutty loves. Sankarankutty can be seen wherever there is sticking on Chenda. During the festival, his job is to go around all the temples. Where the elephant is raised, where it is bathed, where it pulls the wood…, he will stand for as long as he needs to see the elephant. Sankarankutty has no particular work to do. But he will help everyone. From picking up the kites of children who fly kites that are stuck in the tree to white-washing the walls of the next house. Sankarankutty possesses the skills to work but is hindered by a sense of sloth, compounded by his passion for festivals. He is a big foodie. He is sleepy. He enjoys a leisurely lifestyle, supported by his daughter’s earnings from housework in Thiruvananthapuram. The narrative of Kodiyetam unfolds a significant transformation in Sankarankutty’s life, marked by experiential learning. The film concludes with scenes depicting a life once immersed in the allure of festivals gradually awakening to the responsibilities and duties that come with it.
The theme of the film can be interpreted in alternative ways by delving into the history of Travancore. Adoor draws from his experiences in awakening a dormant society and fostering its activism through the interventions of renaissance movements, peasant and labor movements, and the united Kerala movement. Adoor’s own childhood was shaped by such transformative experiences, and he is intimately acquainted with the nuances of rural life during that era. In every village, there likely existed individuals akin to Sankarankutty, to varying degrees. Kodiyetam unfolds as a narrative reflecting these realities. Through the lens of Adoor’s storytelling, the audience witnesses the interplay between Sankarankutty’s story and the historical context of Kerala, observing the repercussions of these interactions in the film’s portrayal of Kodiyetam.
Kodiyetam beautifully captures the essence of Kerala’s nature and rural life during the early decades of the second half of the 20th century. The film not only offers a compelling narrative for casual audiences but also opens up significant possibilities for study and interpretation, particularly for future historians. Adoor’s distinctive style of expression, intertwining rare moments with the everyday lives of ordinary people, lends a unique dimension to the film. The director adeptly writes about the forces that move and sustain Kerala’s village life, blending the physical and static conditions with the dynamic forces of history through the protagonist, Sankarankutty. The film portrays village life stereotypes, such as Sankarankutty’s drowsy expressions, laziness, and his affection for the slow-moving elephant, echoing the pace of rural life. The introduction of a roaring carriage into Sankarankutty’s life symbolizes movement and change, highlighting the inherent difficulties associated with such transitions. Sankarankutty’s physical reaction to the moving lorry, including vomiting, serves as a metaphor for his aversion to movement and preference for inertia. This emphasizes the challenges and reluctance individuals faced when confronted with change. Despite expressing a desire to quit his job as a lorry cleaner, Sankarankutty eventually returns to it, showcasing the complexities of embracing change. The film also delves into Sankarankutty’s curious observations of the lorry driver’s family life, revealing silent and impassive features but intruding on their personal space. Sankarankutty’s inherent goodness, cultivated by village life, becomes evident as he eventually returns to his wife and child. Adoor skillfully brings the protagonist closer to his family without idealizing or romanticizing family life, presenting a nuanced portrayal of the complexities within familial relationships.
In the initial portrayal of Sankarankutty, Adoor depicted him as a seemingly indifferent individual shying away from the responsibilities of family life. However, as the narrative unfolds, Adoor guides his protagonist toward an exploration of family dynamics by showing the divisions and contradictions within and outside the lorry driver family and turns our attention to the injustice of patriarchal family concepts. Through the depiction of the relationship between Sukumarapillai and Kamalamma, Adoor presents a poignant picture of ethical challenges within male-female relationships, culminating in an “unfaithful” relationship that tragically ends with the woman’s suicide. A notable scene in the film subtly conveys the overwhelming impact of Sankarankutty’s love for his child. Although the baby does not physically appear, Adoor skillfully uses river side visual narrative to depict a scene where a baby stands in water with its mother washing and bleaching clothes. Sankarankutty senses a potential danger as he imagines the baby falling into the water, prompting him to stop the lorry and rush down to rescue the child. The baby is scared and cries loudly. The child’s mother says that he scared and made the child cry. Adoor is indirectly narrating the mental journeys of the protagonist. Sankarankutty is changing, becoming a dutiful father.
Adoor effectively conveyed a story of transformation and change, emphasizing the significance of continuous movement in life. He highlighted that those who remain static or resist change fail to truly experience life, while those who intervene, understand, and embrace change find meaning in life’s continuous evolution. Adoor avoided simplistic, slogan-like plots about change and revolution, recognizing that such approaches would spoil the color of his artistic ideas. Instead, Adoor delved into the grassroots of Kerala life, showcasing his prowess as a great realist. The film’s results enabled him to explore the depths of Kerala’s social formation processes. Beyond exposing the unethical nature of male-female relations in Kerala society, Adoor analyzed the social factors that shaped, sustained, nurtured, and transformed Sankarankutty within this ideological framework. Symbols such as temples, festivals, flagpoles, and elephants are portrayed in the film as symbols of the inertia of human life. On the other hand, roaring carts, babies, bursting fireworks, and human labor serve as symbols of life-changing elements. Adoor understood that ideals or undertakings, no matter how great, lack commendation if they are not immersed in the vibrant and dynamic colors of life.
Inertia emerged as a significant theme in Adoor’s early films, revealing a reflection not of the active movement within Kerala society but of historical junctures succumbing to inertness. These films served as a means to discern the inertia affecting society during that period, showcasing Adoor’s keen observation of societal dynamics. The helplessness exhibited by Viswam in Swayamvaram foreshadowed later expressions of hesitancy and dullness in Sankarankutty’s character in Kodiyettam. This thematic exploration expanded further in subsequent films like Elippathayam and Mukhamukham, where the hesitancy and dullness took on transcendental dimensions, providing deeper insights into the societal challenges and struggles.
Part Two: Between Shadows and Histories follows tomorrow.
To read the other blogposts in the ‘Adoor- The Maestro’, click here.
