not on any map
by Douglas Messerli
Louis Malle L’Inde Fantôme (Phantom
India) / 1969
As I’ve expressed several times throughout these pages, over the years I
have grown to see the works of this former “wunderkind,” much beloved by many
film-viewers, as films that I find quite problematic. It’s not that Malle is
not a great director, it’s simply in how he chooses to tell his tales and how
he focuses his films on outsiders and voyeurs that, I feel, weaken his cinema.
In his various tellings of thieves, young disenchanted boys, and unhappy
housewives, Malle often turns to the sentimental as opposed to the wry wit of
Truffaut and Godard.
The overlong Phantom India has
many of the same problems. Yet, because the director openly admits that his
views of India are precisely his own, and because he makes it so very obvious
that this variation of the cinéma vérité is a “film of chance encounters,” the
film becomes not only one of his most personal works, and also one of his most
fascinating directorial pieces.
The film is divided into sections titled:
Episode 1: “The Impossible Camera”
Episode 2: “Things Seen in Madras”
Episode 3: “The Indians and the Sacred”
Episode 4: “Dream and Reality”
Episode 5: “A Look at Castes”
Episode 6: “On the Fringes of Indian Society”
Episode 7: “Bombay”
In Malle’s highly romanticized vision of the country, everything is like a dream, a kind of feral world where it becomes simply an amazing thing to survive. He quotes Mark Twain: “The Ganges is so dirty that even germs cannot survive.”
Malle’s India is a world of outcasts: the Bondo tribe, which speaks a
language utterly separate from any of the numerous other India languages and
live their lives, almost naked, literally raking the fields for eatable
leftover, their women buying metal rings to encircle their necks; the Toda
tribe, which accepts an open sexuality for their youth, and has no sexual
hierarchies; and the Iranian-born Parsis of Bombay, or the Bombay Jews, who,
with their dwindling populations are living on “borrowed time.”
But even in 1969 the Indian government was furious about Malle’s very
personal picture of a much broader and developing culture. Today his work,
given the great changes within that country, seems a bit like a film that might
have been created if a Frenchman had visited the US and concentrated his
efforts on the small, dying Shaker communities, or the Amish farms, American
Indian reservations, or cult groups in Montana and Wyoming. It all might be
fascinating, but it surely would not be a recognizable vision of the mixed-up
people we truly are. Yet, this is, to give Malle credit, a “phantom” country,
not truly anywhere on the map, filmed, as he puts it, by chance. And it is that
casual and accidental relationship with the people and their lives that makes
the production so fascinating, a bit like a visit to a forbidden world where we
know we are unlikely to ever enter in any other way.
Yet, here again his Malle’s voyeurism, his preference for the outcasts
of societies rather than those who survive within the walls of a culture’s
general behavior. And, once again, in taking his camera into these partially
forbidden worlds, one has to ask whether Malle also has helped to destroy them.
Do the Bondos and Todas still exist today? Surely some of the castes he
describes are gradually disappearing. If we don’t really need picturesque
snapshots of India’s many beautiful tourist sites, it might still be nice to
have a more nuanced view of the culture, a kind of mix of Satyajit Ray and Jean
Renoir as opposed to a view of that country as all awkward angles, like the
adolescent youths that Malle also portrayed. But then, some would argue that’s
a very white western view, just as romantic as Malle’s vision—or even a
Bollywood movie!
Los Angeles, April 27, 2019
Reprinted from World Cinema Review (April 2019).
No comments:
Post a Comment