Between Reviews: Of Thespers and Tubers
OF THESPERS AND TUBERS
MAY 25, 2008 - I LOVE THE POTATO. I love it when it’s diced into little cubes and tossed around in a generously greased wok. I love it when it’s sliced into wafers and deep-fried and brushed ever-so-lightly with spices. I love it as a hash-brown wedge between slices of white bread, ketchup on the side. And I think I’d love it – though I’ve never actually tried this – cooked in its jacket, a dab of butter melting down the middle, as in the mouthwatering lunch baskets that the kids in the Enid Blyton books always seemed to be dipping into. So, yes, I love the potato. I’ve eaten potatoes all my life. I know exactly what it’s going to taste like. Sometimes, when it’s in front of me, I’d like it salted a little more, or perhaps a little less oily. But the general idea of the potato – have I said this already? – I like very, very much.
And that’s why I like Amitabh Bachchan – and Kamal Hassan, for that matter, along with Naseeruddin Shah and several others I’ll refrain from naming because this isn’t a listing exercise. Neither is this an attempt to single out these actors as tubers, however starchy an occasional performance might turn out. This is about the milky mysteries of fandom, about why some performers always manage to speak to you from the other side of the cinema screen – despite the kind of film they’re in, despite the kind of show they’re putting on. As a critic, I know I’m supposed to be above all this. I know I’m supposed to judge the effectiveness of an actor’s work based on criteria like how high an eyebrow is arched (or how low the voice is pitched) while expressing an emotion.
But the simple fact is that you’re not always a critic; sometimes, you’re simply a fan. You get used to an actor, and – by extension – you get used to his (or her) tics. And that familiarity – that knowing expectation of what’s to come, much like the knowing expectation of how a chip is going to taste – is, most times, enough to put a performance across. To a fan, the goodness (or the badness) of the performance isn’t as important as the Amitabh-ness of the performance. After all, what you like about the potato is its very essence, its potato-ness – and this is why people who prefer spinach are likely to scoff at potato lovers. It’s too this, they’ll say, too that. How can you possibly find anything to like about it? And all I’ll say is: these are my taste buds, this is my taste.
These reflections are motivated not – as some are likely to suspect – by virtue of this piece being written in the hours preceding lunch (on a day that I skipped breakfast), but by the recent war-of-the-words between Amitabh Bachchan and the film critic Khalid Mohamed. The latter, in a review of Bhoothnath titled “To boo or not to boo,” expressed, in no uncertain words, his distaste over Bachchan’s performance in the film (and over Bachchan’s of-late performances, in general). And Bachchan, through his blog, issued a retaliation that, quite frankly, came as a shock to long-time followers of the actor. (It’s not so much what he said as the words he said it in. After years of otherworldly tact and diplomacy, he seemed to be making an I’m-not-going-to-take-this-lying-down-any-more proclamation to his attacker, the way his on-screen characters so often did to their attackers. Sometimes, if we only care to look, life is but an extension of our masala movies.)
Anyway, this exchange found its way to my blog, where I’d archived my review of the film (that appeared in this newspaper) – and several readers wrote in to say that they agreed with Mohamed, that the “sickeningly sick kid in Cheeni Kum was as irritating as Bachchan himself in the movie,” and that Bachchan was on an “endless ego trip,” and that “if only he put some of that passion and intelligence [displayed on his blog] into his (current) performances.” And all this, in the form of comments, at the bottom of a review where I’d observed that “the leads make Bhoothnath worthwhile.” So now you see why all that preambling prattle about tubers and taste?
But this isn’t a defence of my verdict. (As an aside, I love it when people say things like the critic’s “verdict” is such-and-such, or that the critics have “ruled” that… It makes me feel like I’m on a throne – the non-porcelain version, thank you very much – holding forth my sceptre, sentencing unworthy cinema to an eternity in the dungeons.) No. What got me interested in writing this piece was the not-exactly-earth-shattering realisation that I’d excuse the very things in some actors – my “potato” actors – that I’d use to run down the “spinach” set. (Of course, it’s the same with everyone, except that who’s potato and who’s spinach may vary.) With Bachchan, say, it would be foolish to go looking for the incandescence of his performances from the seventies’ films – but if he does nothing more than channel those old tics, those comfortingly familiar tics, into new characters, that’s… okay. It’s like the first bite into the filling of a just-fried samosa. It’s home.
Copyright ©2008 The New Sunday Express. This article may not be reproduced in its entirety without permission. A link to this URL, instead, would be appreciated.
// “It makes me feel like I’m on a throne – the non-porcelain version, thank you very much – holding forth my sceptre, sentencing unworthy cinema to an eternity in the dungeons. ”
heh heh
have you ever had any actor/director call ya up or threaten ya for rubbishing their movies/performances in your reviews ?
and oh , didja read the suderman vs vikram blogpost?
sooper!…hain!!(left hand extended);-)
All that aside, the man writes fabulously and he could turn quite a few people into his fans just for his writing
“….cooked in its jacket, a dab of butter melting down the middle, as in the mouthwatering lunch baskets that the kids in the Enid Blyton books always seemed to be dipping into.”
Man, those Enid Blyton lunches always did look incredibly tasty, didn’t they? For the record, I have never craved a potato more than after your first paragraph. And yes, I am low-carbing, so thanks.
sir, true dat!
Baradwaj, you are making much aloo about nothing
awwwwWWW cho chweet
still ‘the fan’ by the sound of it
Arun: According to the Chennai newspaper grapevine, it was a close call a couple of times — but even in those cases, no one called *me* directly.
Raghav: Hain?
Anonymous: Oh yeah, he writes very well indeed.
SB: Sorry, the intention was not to prey on food cravings. But those books gave you the feeling she could just as easily had a career in food writing.
wb: Oh it is…
Ravi K: Hey - bad puns are MY thing.
DPac: Kinda the point of the whole piece, isn’t it?
And this is one of the funniest things I’ve seen of late.
Bardwaj,
speaking of fans just an aside
http://madness-of-madras.blogspot.com/2008/05/mani-matters-3.html
just fanning the madras male flame
br, but then, nobody would complain about Emrah hashmi’s Hashminess, would they?
Let me put it this way: Amitabh is either
A) This thespian, *great* actor , the best ever , or atleast the best ever Indian one.
or
B) Another in the line of a combination of superstar, style, competence and charisma, whose constituency happens to be the current set of movie fans (of all ages) in a language that dominates geographically in India
If it is A), then it is not backed up by his performances
If it is B), well, it is B) and while you seem to be hinting at B) and enjoying his performance as B), a majority of Bollywood fraternity (including critics)is using his (B)-ness as a supposed proof for his (A)-ness - Raja Sen, anyone? Which is annoying and sickening
Do you see where we come from now?
Santosh Kumar T K: ah, that small spark has becoming a raging fire, I see (just continuing the metaphor)
raj: Yes, I was going along the lines of (B), but I do understand why it would get annoying if (B) became a defacto route to (A) — if I’m reading your comment right
Wolfgang SuroorSen! Hilarious! BTW, Bardwaj, no word on Vijay Tendulkar?
yeah tendulakar and then something on ‘DA skull’ as well..
2 things i am waiting for…
Rangan….Just wondering if you’re gonna experience the latest Indiana Jones and more importantly r u gonna subsequently transmit that experience electronically ????
wb/DPac/karthik: My only exposure to Tendulkar has been through his work with Parallel Cinema. I’m not sure that I’m qualified to write about him. But Skull, yes… in the column, perhaps.
“..but I do understand why it would get annoying if (B) became a defacto route to (A) — if I’m reading your comment right ”
if you mean
“but I dont understand why it would get annoying if (B) became a defacto route to (A) — if I’m reading your comment right ”
Then I have to remind you that eventually this would pave the way for the likes of Vijay and Ajith to be included in A) - which is a shuddering thought - ok, so the levels might be different but if the concept of B) leading to A) is taken to its extreme, tht is a possibility we have to consider
Baradwaj, I differ with you on this. You would like Potato only if it’s well cooked and not when it’s stale. The potato and it’s taste are two different things, right? I like Rajini for what he had been in ‘Mullum Malarum’ or ‘16 vayathinile’. But that doesn’t prevent me to despise him for what he is doing now in the likes of ‘Sivaji’.If we start consuming all this we can’t comment on what a Vijay or Simbhu is doing. There would be always people who’d say that they like them irrespective of what they represent on screen.
chandra: I’m not sure about that Rajini example. Now if Rajini did character roles, that might be a more apt comparison. I doubt AB would have many fans left if were still doing Shahenshah-type roles.