Between Reviews: Writing to a Writer

Picture courtesy: expressbuzz.com

WRITING TO A WRITER

Here’s a look at the letters that wend their way to your friendly neighbourhood film critic.

JUN 7, 2009 – WHEN YOU WRITE ABOUT FILMS FOR A LIVING, you get accustomed to three types of feedback. The first is the best kind, the most valuable kind, from the involved reader who devours your work with utmost concentration and is subsequently impelled to submit his raves or rants. I recently compiled – for Zeitgeist, coinciding with the release of Milk – a list of films where much-lauded actors had stepped out of the fictional closet, and an involved reader sent forth a “how could you” letter. “How could you make a list of gay-themed movies and not include the seminal (in every sense of the word) Brokeback Mountain?” The “how could you” letter can sometimes assume a combative pose, as if the aggrieved writer sustained serious bodily harm on account of my deliberations. (Sample: “How could you not see that Drona is a sun-ripened lump of goat turd?”)

This kind of feedback is valuable because it tells you, for one thing, that despite the Cassandras prophesising the demise of the reading propensity, there are people out there reading you. And secondly, they are involved enough with what they read that they devote a few precious minutes to record their impressions in the form of a letter. They may have misunderstood something you said, or wish you’d dwelt upon an aspect of a film that you opted not to, or better yet, they may have seen an entirely different film from the one you saw, which might lead them to, depending on their personality, either label your mother a canine or genuinely seek to reconcile the differences in viewing experience – but whatever the case, such feedback paints a vigorous portrait of who’s reading your work, how many of them, and (if you’re lucky) why.

For a critic, this is the equivalent of box office numbers for a star – a rating of relevance, so to speak, that’s touchingly compounded when a kind reader asks, as he did last week, why I do not write reviews of Hindi films anymore. (Simple answer: Because there are no Hindi films to review, a turn of events that looks to be remedied soon with the bloody bout between producers and multiplexes having entered its final rounds.) This sense of a critic’s relevance is occasionally inflated to unrealistic degrees, which brings me to the second kind of letter writer – the earnest enthusiast seeking a career in the movies, who treats the critic as some sort of gatekeeper manning those hallowed portals. I have received letters from fans of directors and actors requesting me to engineer an encounter with their idols, and from students seeking filmmakers to pitch their screenplays to.

I am flattered that I’m assumed to wield such powers of persuasion with members of the filmmaking community – many of whom, inevitably, treat the critic like, well, a sun-ripened lump of goat turd – but you’d have better luck making a cold call. Just how does one make it as a screenwriter, especially if you have no contacts, no helpful hands holding you through these tortuous terrains, where the quality of your contribution is frequently a secondary consideration to your talents at sucking up and selling out? Assuming there’s a surefire answer to this question, the person possessing the solution won’t spill his secrets in a column like this one, choosing instead to rake in crores writing a book on the subject. (Translation: That person is certainly not me. Therefore, much as I am sympathetic to your wishes of making it in films, your letters need to be directed elsewhere.)

The third kind of letter writer wishes to become a critic and wants to know how to go about entering a profession rife with the unmitigated joys of “how could you” feedback. The profile of this sort of correspondent is eerily like my own before I became a critic – a drone at a corporate job, discontent about making the kind of money that many others would gladly donate an arm or a leg for, and seeking to alleviate this ennui by scratching that creative itch. The contents of the correspondence go typically along these lines: “Movies are my passion. I have a blog where I write reviews. I’d like to do this full-time. How do I begin? How do I approach newspapers? What’s the money like in freelancing? Otherwise, without any previous credentials, how do I become the in-house critic (like you are) for a paper?”

Some of these questions are easy – you’d only need to call a local newspaper for answers. My beginnings were a series of flukes. I started writing reviews that I mailed out to friends, who then mailed them out to their friends, and this chain kept growing till my former editor chanced upon my writing and spoke to me about contributing to The New Indian Express. But this was before the blog era, and it’s so much easier, today, to train people’s eyes towards your writing. (Then again, considering the infinite dimensions of the blogosphere, perhaps it’s also that much more difficult.) But that’s just the humdrum mechanics of it all. Do you like to analyse film? Can you translate this analysis into writing? And are you honest about this process – to yourself first, and only then to your reader – even if goes against popular taste? Those are the difficult questions.

Copyright ©2009 The New Sunday Express. This article may not be reproduced in its entirety without permission. A link to this URL, instead, would be appreciated.

15 Comments

  1. brangan Says:

    Yup, the bald guy with the green beard — that’s me. It’s the illustration that came with the column in the paper today :-)

  2. chhote saab Says:

    yeah, so when are you gonna introduce me to SRK or AK! In this time of recession I’ll even take SK (Shahid Kapur)! Jokes apart, one person who seems very interesting is Rajat Kapoor – his films and your interview of him being the basis.

  3. Priti Says:

    its unfortunate that this post is restricted to the letters you get. maybe sometime, you should consider writing a post on the kind of comments you get: the ones which relentlessly bash bollywood no matter what, the ones which draw references/comparisons to obscure-to-us-lowly-mortals world cinema, the secular, the pseudo secular, the pro RSS, the ones written by shahrukh fans, the ones written by shahrukh haters, the endless ilayaraja-rahman comparisons, the good-for-nothign comments (like this one)… :D

    that would make for such wonderful reading, seriously!

  4. Jabberwock Says:

    Glad to see you took my advice and dyed your beard. Massive improvement!

  5. Nirmal Says:

    Really.? I somehow always thought of you as a somewhat fat guy.:-)

  6. s Says:

    y is ur beard green?
    y r u wearing a salman khan t-shirt?
    can u introduce me to maniratnam? better still, can u somehow meet maniratnam(now that there is a raavan sometime in the future)? can i be a fly on the wall during that interview?

  7. brangan Says:

    Nirmal: Oh, you know how the camera adds ten pounds ;-)

  8. Bala Says:

    Baradwaj,
    Didn’t you miss out a fourth category ? Groupies ? :D

  9. Varun Says:

    Talking about the quality of comments – A friend, fearing ‘rediff-type’ comments on his excellent cricket site (www.holdingwilley.com) has turned comments section off in most of the articles. And I keep giving him example of Blogical Conclusions that over a period of time, one does ‘achieve’ a sensible (or whatever fits the site) readership and comments reflect the same.

    In fact, the quality of comments at your site is by far the best i have seen on an Indian forum…though moderation might have something to do with that. Would be interesting to know what percentage of submitted comments make it to the final view?

  10. Shalini Says:

    Are reader responses(blog or newspaper) your favorite part of the job?:-) I’m guessing that writing for a living can get a little isolating at times – hopefully the feedback(whatever the form – brickbats or bouqets)reinforces a sense of connection with the larger world.

  11. Krishna Says:

    @Varun:
    If you’re talking about the responsible commentators, isn’t that almost a corollary to the quality of thought expressed ?

    It’d probably feel much easier to trash a regular news item; with,say, sify’s entire set of stories being refreshed every half a day or so.
    Not that it is a justification. :) .

  12. brangan Says:

    Varun: There is no moderation on this blog as such, unless there’s name-calling or some such thing.

    Shalini: Yes and no — yes, because this way, there is some kind of communication with the audience and no because I don’t really “know” the commenters/writers and there’s only so much I’d want to explain or reveal. (I used to be much more needier about being understood earlier. These days it’s all one big shrug.)

    And you’re right that writing can get isolating — but I don’t see how it could be any other way. I’ve always marvelled at those who can write in offices filled with people and noise. I could never do that. Perhaps that’s why my former editor calls me “high maintenance” :-)

  13. SheWhoMustNotBeNamed Says:

    Nice caricature :)

  14. Deepak Says:

    One thing id like to know is though, where do you get all the foreign movies that you watch? Apart from film fests..

    Im sure you dont download em :) Rent movies at Cinema Paradiso, do you??

  15. brangan Says:

    Deepak: They’re all over the place — from libraries to private collections. You just have to look.

Leave a Reply