 |
| Adrija Guha |
Abstract
This paper seeks to study various intentions
and objectives behind writing autobiographies and how various factors come
together in the writing of this text. With a close textual analysis of Uttam
Kumar’s autobiographies Amar Ami (1979-80) and Harie Jawa Dinguli Mor
(1961-63), this essay will explore the various reasons that are responsible
for the making (or writing) of an autobiography, the factors responsible for
that and the complex relation between the subject, author, reader and the
publisher, and the construction of an image or an identity. The paper will
focus on the construction of image, how autobiographies and life narratives are
reflexive by nature and how they are constructed by human beings through active
ratiocination and, in doing so, will offer a new paradigm for an understanding
of the autobiographies of film stars.
Keywords
construction of an
image, ratiocination, creation of ‘star’ persona, publicity.
Main Text
The film Nayak
begins with the matinee idol, Arindam Mukherjee, who is going to Delhi to
receive a prestigious award. In the train he meets Aditi Sengupta, editor of a
women's magazine, Adhunika. Though not his fan, she expresses her wish
of taking his interview for her magazine as this would increase its popularity.
When asked about his life, he replies that his biography has been published in
quite a few journals and hence many people already know about his life. Aditi
reveals that she already knows what others know about his life; she is more
interested to know about his regrets. He sternly says that revealing his
regrets might have a drastic effect on his career; they (filmstars) wander in
the world of shadows and hence it will be better not to expose their body of
flesh and blood in front of the public. When asked whether she has understood
what he has said, she replies in positive, saying that they always want to
remain a ‘hero’ in the eyes of the public. Hence only those facts about his
life are published which will help him to maintain this status quo. Though it
is said that Nayak is the fictionalized autobiography of Uttam Kumar,
Bengal’s matinee idol, this essay will not focus on the film’s autobiographical
elements. Rather, the essay would take this film as a starting point to
understand the various intentions and objectives behind writing autobiographies
and how various factors come together in the writing of this text. Focussing
primarily on Uttam Kumar’s autobiographies Amar Ami (1979-80) and Harie
Jawa Dinguli Mor (1961-63), this essay will explore the various reasons
that goes into the making (or writing) of an autobiography, the factors
responsible for that and the complex relation between the subject, author,
reader and the publisher, and the construction of an image or an identity.
Uttam Kumar needs
no introduction. He was and is a well-known personality not only in Bengal,
Bangladesh but also all over India. Describing Uttam Kumar, Shoma A. Chatterjee
writes, “Uttam was to Bengali cinema what Amitabh Bachhan has been to
mainstream Hindi cinema …” (Chatterjee 30). The Bengal film industry never ever
saw the rise of another star. Till today, all the Bengali heroes taken together
cannot match Uttam Kumar’s charisma and his versatile performances. He is still
the Matinee Idol. His father was the chief operator in Metro cinema and his
mother was a simple housewife. Born in an extremely middle class family, Uttam
Kumar worked at the Calcutta Port Commissioner’s Office, before making it big
in cinema. Till now, Bengali cinema can boast of only three ‘stars’ – Durgadas
Bandopadhyay, Pramathesh Barua and Uttam Kumar. Durgadas Bandopadhyay was
primarily a theatre actor and during that time (in the early 1900s), film
acting was heavily influenced by the theatre. Pramathesh Barua was primarily a
director. However, Uttam Kumar was a complete package: be it his versatile acting,
bewitching smile, golden voice, demeanour, ‘star’ status or attitude towards
others – he was unparalleled. No doubt various eminent personalities have tried
to pen down his biography and, most of the time, have earned a positive result.
However, this essay will discuss the autobiographies written by Uttam Kumar . Harie
Jawa Dinguli Mor was published in the Nabakallol journal in a serialized
form from 1961 to 1963 and covers his life till 1962 when he was at the peak of
fame, success and popularity. Thus it is incomplete. Amar Ami was
published in a serialized form in Prasad journal in 1979-80. The 1st
edition was published by Mitra & Ghosh and the 2nd edition, by
Dey’s Publishing House. In a letter to the editor, Uttam Kumar writes that he
did not want his autobiography to be published then but he could not say no to
the young writer-journalist Gourango Ghosh; hence he has given his consent.
Having said so, he also confesses that though the genre of autobiography
demands to be told everything, at that time it was not possible for him to
reveal everything about his life. However, in the second edition, he promises,
that he would write more about the unknown things about his life.
Harie Jawa Dinguli
Mor
begins with an interesting line: ‘At first I thought that I would not write.
Later I was forced to take the pen in my hand, thinking that I also have
something to tell you. Hence here I am to give voice to my unsaid words’ (my
translation). He goes on to write what audience thinks about him – that he
lives in a fairy-tale-like-world – and what he actually is and how his life is
shaped by the joys and sorrows, just like anyone else’s. He tells us in great
details where he was born, why he changed his name from Arun Kumar Chatterjee
to Uttam Kumar, his family members, the lasting impact on him of the death of
his elder sister, Putul, his struggle to become an actor, all those years of
frustrations when he vacillated between the idea of resigning from the job
(which would have been a high risk as he was the only earning member of the
family) and giving up on acting (as the films where he managed to get some
roles, flopped and he was tagged ‘flop master general’ by the industry) and,
above all, he tells us about his relationship with his wife, Gauri, how he
madly fell in love with her, pursued her, quite in the manner of a film hero,
and, at last, married her. Said in a nutshell, this story does make him a real
life hero who never quits. His is the story of rags to riches, a story which is
a common story of all the successful people! It follows the same pattern: how
poor they were, the struggles they had to go through, how they put up with
life, faced the hurdles and, ultimately, turned out to be winners. Thus he
comes across as the exact persona whom the audience have imagined all
throughout. Hence we cannot dismiss this autobiography as a mere confession,
where he is simply letting out his thoughts to the audience. It was in 1961-63,
when he was at the peak of success. Publication of this autobiography, in a
serialized form, helped him to add to his ‘star’ value.
Shoma A.
Chatterjee in her book Suchitra Sen: The Legend and the Enigma addresses
this question – Who is a ‘Star’? Quoting Richard Dyer, who in his Stars
has said how a ‘star is an image’ and not a real person and how this image is
constructed out of a range of materials, Chatterjee writes how “icons and
celebrities are constructed by institutions for financial gain, and target a
specific audience/group of people” (Chatterjee 77). She goes on to write:
[T]he ‘star’
persona is a fictional identity that almost subconsciously creates fashion
trends, popular phrases for the audience to imitate and imbibe and so on. The
persona of the star is, therefore, a fictional identity created, constructed
and designed, consciously by the film industry and the media, and
subconsciously by the audience. Thus when an individual attains ‘stardom’ and
becomes a star, like Suchitra Sen, and reigns over the audience and the industry
for a long span of time, she can influence her audience and her fans if she so
wishes. Even if she does not wish to do so, they can get influenced by the
screen image of the star as they see her on screen and through magazines,
interviews and so on. (Chatterjee 77).
The same thing can
be said for Uttam Kumar as well. In this connection we should keep in mind that
during that time there was no outburst of media and the only place where the
audience got a glimpse of their favourite stars was the print media and film
magazines. Whereas the films portrayed them in a stereotypical manner, the
print media was the only platform where the audience could see or read about
the private lives of the stars. Since there was no television during that time,
these magazines played an important role: they helped the stars in publicity
which helped them to retain their images even when they were not doing any
film. On the other hand, the audience got to know about their favourite stars
and the more they came to know about them, the more they craved for. This
helped the ‘stars’ to maintain their image which was really important for the
marketing of their films. Uttam Kumar was well aware of his image. It is said
that Satyajit Ray had once thought about filming Ghare Baire with
Soumitra Chatterjee playing the role of Nikhilesh, Uttam Kumar playing the role
of Sandip and Suchitra Sen playing the role of Bimala. The project did not
materialize then as Uttam Kumar declined the role of Sandip because he did not
want to do a negative role at that phase of his career as that would have
destroyed his ‘image’. Years later, Ray did the film with a different casting. Thus
Uttam Kumar was very much aware of his position as a ‘star’ and did everything
to maintain that image.
The years
mentioned here – 1961 – 1963 – were some of the turbulent years in Uttam
Kumar’s life. It was in 1963 that he left his house forever and started living
in with Supriya Devi. Though he mentions this incident in Amar Ami,
still other details were consciously omitted. Writing about his love life, he
writes in great details about his wife Gauri Devi but hardly mentions the names
of Suchitra Sen and Sabitri Chattopadhyay with whom, he once admitted to a
reporter, he had an emotional attachment. In an interview, director Saroj De
once told Himangshu Chattopadhyay, a reputed journalist, that after the release
of the films Agnipariksha and Sobar Upare – films that ushered
the Uttam-Suchitra pair and made them ‘stars’ overnight – Uttam Kumar was
offered two films – Bhalobasa by Debaki Kumar Bose and Sagarika
by Saroj De. Undoubtedly, Debaki Kumar Bose’s film was a better choice
considering Debaki Kumar Bose’s stature as one of the top directors of that
time. However, Uttam Kumar chose the film Sagarika just because of his
friendship with Suchitra. Incidents like this were in abundance. However, their
friendship went through a tough time and often there were ego clashes, which
have been accepted by the biographers of both Uttam Kumar and Suchitra Sen and
the technicians and personalities of the film industry. It was around 1958-59
when he got involved with Supriya Devi. Stories of their escapades were quite
known to everyone. In her autobiography, Madhabi Mukherjee, a renowned actress
of that time, also writes at one place how Uttam Kumar had made a pass on her
during the shooting of one of their films. Though in his autobiographies, there
are mentions of how due to his work load, he could not give time to his son,
hardly there is any reference to the marital problems between him and his wife
and his cheating on her. There is also no mention of his proposals to Suchitra
Sen of marriage. In this connection we have to remember that love outside
marriage was considered a taboo and his image was that of an ideal man, a
one-woman man, an upright and honest man. Any revelation regarding his romantic
relationships would have had disastrous effect on his career. Uttam, the
author, knew this very well and hence he did not make Uttam, the character, do
any such thing.
In this connection
other things should also be mentioned. He had ego clashes with Suchitra Sen,
Satyajit Ray and Soumitra Chatterjee. As a result, many times he referred to
Supriya Devi for the female lead role instead of other heroines. Incidents like
his insecurity related to Supriya Devi; how he forced her to decline various
projects in Bombay or the news of Supriya Devi being pregnant with his child
and the eventual abortion - have been carefully averted. There were also
incidents where his murder was planned. Apart from this there was a constant
tussle between his two families regarding his property. Even the initial flame
of the Uttam-Supriya romance did not last long and he was a lonely person. Uttam
Kumar consciously did not mention these too. Of course he did not want to
expose the dark sides of the industry where he had to survive. We come to know
about these incidents (except the financial one) in Supriya Devi’s
autobiography (Amar Jiban, Amar Uttam). The logic is simple. The author
Uttam Kumar knew very well what the public would like to know about him. Even
when he mentioned Supriya Devi in the 2nd edition of Amar Ami,
he repeatedly said that Supriya Devi was passing through a troubled time in her
marriage; he tried to patch things up; later he realised how dependent she was
on him and hence, one night when he had a quarrel with Gauri Devi, he left his
home and came to Supriya Devi. This narrative again makes him the ‘hero’ that
he was onscreen, rescuing a damsel in distress.
Apart from this
there were mentions of Shilpi Sansad and his contribution as its President. He
has also highlighted his social roles and how he has tried to stand by the
people in times of need; be it flood or Indo-china war or any personal problem.
He has always been there for everyone. There is also a mention of an incident
in Amar Ami regarding the shooting of his film Harano Sur. He was
also the producer of this film. According to the incident he was busy shooting
for another film and just because the director requested, he decided to
complete the shooting of this film. This required him to cancel the shooting of
his own film – Harano Sur- on that day. Without thinking about the loss
he would face, he cancelled his shooting of Harano Sur just for the sake
of the director of the other film. Even when he had left his Bhowanipur house
and was living with Supriya Devi at Moira Street, we are told that he visited
his mother daily before he went to the studio and always fulfilled his
responsibilities. I am not questioning the authenticity of these incidents.
What I want to highlight is that his autobiographies are filled with such
instances only. Thus the image of a responsible, dutiful son, husband, father,
friend, colleague, and above all, a citizen is maintained all throughout.
Does this mean
that Uttam Kumar, the author, invented Uttam Kumar, the character? Definitely
no. Autobiography is not a fictional narrative of a person’s life written by
the same person; it is rather factual. Various factual narratives of a person’s
life are chosen and are integrated and incorporated into a structured narrative
which is then told to others and also to oneself so that the author of the
autobiography can lead a functional life. According to Louis A. Renza, “we can
stress that in selecting, ordering, and integrating the writer's lived
experiences according to its own teleological demands, the autobiographical
narrative is beholden to certain imperatives of imaginative discourse” (Renza
269). James M. Cox is of the opinion that many autobiographies are “charged,
condensed narrative[s] through which the autobiographer symbolically reckons
with his life as it was lived in socially dramatic situations, in revolutionary
periods, for example, "when politics and history become dominant realities
for the imagination" (p. 252)” (Renza 269). The same theory can be applied
on Uttam Kumar’s autobiographies. Whether the deaths of Rabindranath Tagore or
the charismatic figure of Subhash Chandra Bose or the Indo-china war or the
Vietnam War or Naxal Andolon or the deaths of famous personalities, for
example, Charlie Chaplin, Uttam Kumar has tried to live the life in his
autobiography as he was ought to have lived. In that case the author-Uttam
Kumar is a double of the character-Uttam Kumar.
Writing
autobiographies by the celebrities have become a common phenomenon. Almost all
the famous stars of the Golden period of Bengali cinema have written their
autobiographies, with the exception of Suchitra Sen. Quite interestingly,
Suchitra Sen not writing her own autobiography led to the publication of her
numerous biographies by various authors which still have a huge market demand. Whether
it is the autobiography of Uttam Kumar or Amitabh Bachhan or Prasenjit or
Priyanka chopra, autobiographies of famous celebrities are always in demand as
one gets to have a peek into the life of the celebrity. Secondly, a market is
also created for the same. Most of the time the catch line is that in his/ her
autobiography, the celebrity has opened his / her heart and has revealed the
secrets which are unknown to the audience so far. This traps the audience’s
curiosity and works in both ways. It helps the audience to get to know some
factual details of the life of the star; the stars get a chance to be in the
limelight and this helps in their marketing; it helps them to earn a lump sum
also; the publishing house encashes the popularity of the star and makes the
most out of it. The more popular a star is, the more his / her
biography/autobiography is in demand.
2020 and 2021 are
years which have left a lasting impact on the people all over the world. Amidst
this pandemic, Penguin Random House released the much awaited book on 9
February 2021. The book is Unfinished: A Memoir and is written by
Priyanka Chopra. Soon after its release, it got listed as the Number 1
bestseller on Amazon. Com and Amazon.in, a fact shared by the author herself in
an Instagram story. Announcements of its publication was made long ago in 2018.
The book was to be published by Penguin Random House in India, Ballantine Books
in the US and Michael Joseph in the UK. Regarding the book Chopra said in an
interview, “The flavour of the book will be honest, funny, spirited, bold, and
rebellious, just like me” (“Priyanka Chopra”). She added, "I have always
been a private person; I've never spoken about my feelings during my journey
but I am ready to do so now" (“Priyanka Chopra”). Talking about the
purpose behind writing this book, she said: "I would like to tell my story
in the hope of inspiring people - especially women -- to change the
conversation, to shatter glass ceilings. Women are always told we can't have
everything. I want everything, and I believe anyone else can have it too. I'm
proof of it" (“Priyanka Chopra”). The few aspects which get highlighted
here are the social position of a person, his / her ‘life story’ as an
inspiration, a specific motive behind writing that ‘life story’ and the role of
the publishers; all these aspects come together in a life narrative. Priyanka
Chopra is not the first person in the film industry to write an autobiography.
This path has been treaded by many celebrities.
Various factors
come together in the writing of an autobiography. No doubt the wish to explain
oneself to others, to share one’s experiences with others are there. But one
cannot ignore the other factors behind the writing and publication of an
autobiography. No doubt, biographies of Uttam Kumar and Suchitra Sen are still
written and are reprinted whereas hardly any biography is written of Sabitri
chattopadhyay, undoubtedly much more gifted actor than Mrs. Sen though could
never match her ‘star’ personality. Her only autobiography was published in
2010 !
Once in an article ‘ Nijeke Janai’, Suchitra Sen wrote that it is impossible to know an artist through a few factual details of his/her life. She adds that there are questions which can never have any specific answer; whatever answer the artist gives, is superficial. Though she was talking about interviews of artists, still the point she raised is applicable on any writing by an artist. Autobiographies and life narratives are reflexive by nature. Keeping aside the problems of verification, determinacy and authenticity, there are other problems too; especially with the “autobiographical narrator’s irresistible error in accounting for his acts in terms of intentions when, in fact, they might have been quite otherwise determined” (Bruner 13). In Aristotlean sense art imitates life whereas in Oscar Wildean sense life imitates art. Similarly, narrative imitates life and life imitates narrative. “ “Life” in this sense is the same kind of construction of the human imagination as a “narrative” is. It is constructed by human beings through active ratiocination, by the same kind of ratiocination through which we construct narratives” (Bruner 13). Hence, an autobiography can be best read as another text where the author and the protagonist are the same person and the characters do not have any fictional names but real-life names. As about the details provided in the autobiography, the facts are taken from real life (though sometimes we can question their authenticity as well) and to that is added a reflection and imagination which more often than not colour any narrative.
Works Cited
Bruner, Jerome.
“Life as Narrative.” Social Research, Vol. 54, No. 1, Reflections on the Self (SPRING 1987), pp. 11-32.
Chatterjee, Shoma
A. Suchitra Sen: the Legend and the Enigma. Harper Collins, 2015.
“Priyanka Chopra to come out with memoir in
2019.” Business Standard. 19 June 2018
Renza, Louis A. “The Veto of the Imagination: A Theory of Autobiography.” New Literary History 9 (1977), pp. 1-26.
No comments :
Post a Comment
We welcome your comments related to the article and the topic being discussed. We expect the comments to be courteous, and respectful of the author and other commenters. Setu reserves the right to moderate, remove or reject comments that contain foul language, insult, hatred, personal information or indicate bad intention. The views expressed in comments reflect those of the commenter, not the official views of the Setu editorial board. рдк्рд░рдХाрд╢िрдд рд░рдЪрдиा рд╕े рд╕рдо्рдмंрдзिрдд рд╢ाрд▓ीрди рд╕рдо्рд╡ाрдж рдХा рд╕्рд╡ाрдЧрдд рд╣ै।