Adaptation: The novel Guide into Film 'Guide'
Commercialism as a Determinant in Film Adaptation:
The Case of R.K. Narayan’s The Guide and Dev Anand’s ‘Guide’
Dr. Swagat Patel
patel.swagat@gmail.com
Introduction
In the process of transfer from one medium
to another – that is, from the written to the audio-visual medium – certain
changes become essential. There are three main reasons why a filmmaker may have
to make major changes while adapting a literary work. First is, simply the
changes demanded by the new medium. Film and literature each has its own specific tools for
manipulating narrative structure. In a novel, a new chapter might take us back
to a different time and place in the narrative; in a film, we might go back to
that same time and place through the use of a flashback, a crosscut, or a
dissolve. Second, filmmakers may make
changes to highlight new themes, emphasize different traits in a character, or
even try to solve problems they perceive in the original work. Third, a
filmmaker may make dramatic changes to an adaptation to make a classic story
appear “new” for a contemporary audience.
Besides these three usual aesthetic reasons, there seems to be a fourth
reason – rather non-aesthetic but quite crucial. It is the commercial aspect to
which the Director has to shift his focus to make the film commercially
successful. Sometimes the Director, against his wishes, succumbs to the
pressures of the financiers and make changes in the original material.
The Present Study
The present paper makes an attempt at analysing this commercial aspect
which has brought about changes in the adaptation of R.K. Narayan’s The Guide in the making of Dev and Vijay
Anand’s film Guide.
Adaptations of The Guide and R.K. Narayan’s Reactions
Narayan thought of The
Guide as a quintessentially Indian story, one that was concerned with a
very special facet of Indian life – that vast Indian hinterland of semi-urban
and rural settlements where people cherish traditional values, and old–world
customs and beliefs still retain their hold. The enormous literary success of
the novel brought offers of a Broadway dramatization in New York. The film was
to be shot in English and Hindi versions. A distinguished group of Americans
were to produce the English version with a screenplay by the Nobel Prize winner
Pearl S. Buck – to make it more exotically Indian, the American producers
decided to include a scene featuring two tigers fighting each other and a nude
scene using a duplicate instead of Waheeda Rehman which are not in the novel.
Narayan promptly decided to have as little to do with this version as possible.
As for the Hindi version, for which Dev Anand regularly consulted the author
but apparently paid little heed to his suggestions, Narayan is gently satirical
– “And mark this: actually in colour and the widescreen first time in the history
of this country.”
Both the film versions produced by Dev Anand (in Hindi) and
Pearl S. Buck (in English) made R.K.
Narayan acutely unhappy since he felt that none of them captured the spirit of his story. The Broadway rendering, which
nearly involved him in litigation because of its protests against what he considered
unwarranted cuts and changes folded up after a few performances.
The English film, too, was unsuccessful. However, the Hindi film version shot
at exotic locations in Rajasthan instead of in South India where the original
the novel is located, and starring Dev Anand as Raju and
Waheeda Rehman as Rosie was a great commercial success. Narayan’s own response to
these interpretations of The Guide is
summed up in the wry title of the essay in which he narrates these experiences
– ‘Misguided Guide’.
The Hindi Guide, directed by Vijay Anand with music by
S. D. Burman, won Narayan the Film Fare Award for the ‘best story’, something
about which he is totally silent. Therefore, it is difficult to make his
bemusement at the transposition of his novel from Malgudi in the south Udaipur
and other exotic locations in the north of India where everything, “costumes,
human types and details of daily life,” are vastly different. This naturally
makes for alterations in the characterization, the values which motivate the
characters, and even the plot. Narayan’s Rosie, for instance, is part of a
traditional and orthodox south Indian society, and an exponent of the strictly
classical tradition of the Bharat Natyam, where the dancer actually performs an
act of worship to Lord Shiva Nataraja through the dance. All of these factors
determine her character and her actions in the novel. By contrast, Waheeda
Rehman’s Rosie is far more cosmopolitan – she performs dances which are typical
Bollywood extravaganzas “in deliciously fruity colours and costumes,” and
constantly travels to and fro in an Air India Boeing, no matter how short the
journey is. This was obviously done to cater to the average Mumbai film
audience who might find Narayan’s Rosie too serious and complex for their
taste. Then again, to appease the Board of Censors who might think that the
story is a sort of “glorified adultery” through Rosie’s liaison with Raju, the
character of Marco is substantially changed to create sympathy for the lovers.
The absent-minded archaeologist who leaves Rosie because of her illicit affair
is converted into “a drunkard and a womanizer who kicks out his wife”. Years
later, in his tribute to Narayan after the author’s death in 2001, Dev Anand
said, “If only we had managed to ignore the commercial aspects, Guide could have made a milestone in
the history of cinema … And the author would have been a happier man.
What is interesting to the readers of the novel is not this
comedy of errors as such, as much as Narayan’s evaluation of the way in which
Dev Anand’s film altered the spirit of his story. This tells us a good deal
about how he had conceptualized it in the first place. Narayan regretted that,
by shifting the scene away from Malgudi, an imaginary small town in a
conservative part of South India, the subtleties of his story had been levelled
down completely – “By abolishing Malgudi, they had discarded my own values in
the milieu and human characteristics.” However, to Narayan, the most outrageous
alteration in the Hindi film version was its conclusion. Narayan’s denouement
is ambiguous, open-ended. We get only veiled hints that Raju dies, and the
rains finally come. Narayan’s interest lies in the complexity of human
psychology as projected through Raju, and not in any simple moral fable about
the reward of goodness. The film, on the other hand, ended with pouring rain,
and an elaborate funeral, “to placate eleven financiers … who would not part
with cash unless a satisfactory mourning scene was added. What this tells us by
implication is that the novel was rooted in Narayan’s world-view as symbolized
by Malgudi and its traditional ambience, that the characters and their
destinies were shaped by definite moral qualities, and that the ambiguous
ending of the novel was closely related to its theme. Also, the film version,
by taking its characters too seriously, lacked Narayan’s irony. Ultimately, the
genesis of The Guide can be traced,
not to this or that incident, but to the author’s entire thinking about human
beings and their role in life. To Narayan, this is what was lacking in the film.
Do the Changes Really Make Film Guide a Hit?
Guide is one of the most
remarkable films of Indian Cinema and truly a film that was ahead of its times.
The film is immortalized by Director Vijay Anand's bold, unconventional strokes
who could dare to show a man and woman living together outside the sanctity of
a marriage way back in the 1960s. And that too in a milieu as traditional as
that of Hindi cinema which doesn't allow nonconformist relationships even
today. In fact, it is one of the earliest efforts in Indian Cinema to actually
show its two leading characters as frail human beings who could make mistakes
in life, sin and yet be unapologetic about it. Consequently, Dev Anand, who also
produced the film, was advised by his well-wishers not to venture into such a
project. But it speaks volumes of Dev’s conviction towards the subject matter
that not only did he get a film made on it but a film that still remains as one
of the landmarks of Indian Cinema.
The film, alive with its riot of
colours work best as it looks at the development of the relationship between
Raju and Rosie. Raju's courage and compassion, and the hypocrisy of
'respectable' society's attitude toward 'public women' are powerfully
portrayed, as is the chemistry between him and Rosie aided by tender, poignant
moments and superb dialogues. However, their falling out later, at the height
of Rosie's success, is rendered more sketchily -- the film implies (in
contradiction to its earlier message), that worldly success inevitably corrupts
and that ‘career women’ must indeed construct (in Rosie's words) 'a sort of
fortress around the heart.'
The film is enhanced richly by the
two central performances. Dev Anand gives perhaps his best-shaded performance
in the title role, playing him perfectly with just the right amount of grey and
his perfectly nuanced performance won him his second Filmfare Award for Best
Actor. Good as Dev Anand is, however, the life and soul of Guide are undoubtedly Waheeda Rehman. It was a daring role to play
in those times, of a woman who leaves her stifling impotent husband and lives
with her lover, a guide who helps her in her ambitions to become a famous
dancer. Waheeda was, in fact, told she was committing professional suicide taking
on this role. However, it is to her credit that she was more than able to
humanize Rosie to get the viewer's sympathy with her rather than against her.
Whether breaking the metamorphic pot of social constraints or dancing
precariously over a ledge in keeping with her dangerous new desires, Waheeda
Rehman is outstanding in the film with her portrayal of an adulterous,
career-minded, strong woman. Never has she looked, acted or danced better!
Though R.K. Narayan disowned the film, he had no complaints with Waheeda's
performance as Rosie. She too won the Filmfare Award for Best Actress for Guide. Dev Anand and Waheeda were
supported perfectly by the supporting cast, Kishore Sahu, in particular.
The other big star of Guide was its musical score by S.D.
Burman. The film represents perhaps Burman Dada's greatest work and he is aided
tremendously by Shailendra's lyrics and the flawless rendering of the songs by
Mohd. Rafi, Lata Mangeshkar, Kishore Kumar and Burman himself. Each and every
song be it ‘Aaj Phir Jeene ki Tamanna Hai’, ‘Tere Mere Sapne Ab Ek Rang Hai’,
‘Din Dhal Jaaye, Gaata Rahe Mera Dil’, ‘Piya Tose Naina Lage Re’, ‘Mujhse Chhal
Kiye Ja’ and ‘Kya Se Kya Ho Gaya’ (a rare case of two songs back to back),
‘Allah Megh De’ and ‘Wahaan Kaun Hai Tera’ is perfectly written, composed and
sung. It is indeed shocking that Burman Dada lost out on the Filmfare Award to
Shankar-Jaikishen for their populist score in Suraj (1966), which great as it came nowhere near to Guide's scintillating musical score. Guide also sees Vijay Anand at his peak
and more than reinforces his reputation as Indian Cinema's premier song picturized. Special mention must be made of ‘Aaj Phir Jeene ki Tamanna Hai’
(The famous low angle tracking shot of Waheeda dancing along the ledge of the
temple continues to amaze one even today) and ‘Tere Mere Sapne’ which he canned
in just 3 shots with complex character and camera movements - truly a great
filmmaker at the height of his craft. The film is brilliantly photographed in
Pathe Color (the English version was filmed in Eastman Color) by Fali Mistry
and processed abroad which has helped the print retain its vibrant colours even
today. In addition, special mention must be made of Hiralal's choreography
resulting in some of the most famous dance numbers of Hindi films.
Initially, Guide had a tough time being sold because of its so-called bold
theme but thanks to Production Controller Yash Johar's perseverance, the film
was finally sold and released to great critical acclaim and was a big commercial
success as well even though, as mentioned earlier, R.K. Narayan was most
unhappy with the final film as he felt it deviated too much from his novel.
Deviations
in the Film
One of the major deviations that Vijay Anand
made was to change the setting of the film from Malgudi to Udaipur. This did definitely
give the film an exotic, grand visual look, though this took the original
characters away from the ambience of the small town of Narayan's novel. The
ending too of the film was significantly different from that of the novel.
Director Vijay Anand has always maintained that he was never interested in
merely copying any work of art from one medium to another unless there was
scope for value addition and to be fair to him, he has made Guide into a rich and unforgettable
cinematic experience. The English version, said to be closer to the novel and
in spite of a nude scene using a duplicate instead of Waheeda Rehman, flopped
miserably; but the Hindi version remains a classic to this day.
Films like Guide, Devdas, Sarkar, Raincoat, Jurassic Park and Slumdog
Millionaire all had problems implicit in the material that could have meant
failure. Yet these problems were solved, proving that if we know what we are
doing and do it well, unusual stories can be successful. But how do we know
what to do? And how do we make a seemingly non-commercial work commercial?
Films and televisions show the need to satisfy
the masses to make a profit. Novels and plays have a more selected audience, so
they can cater to a more elite market. They can be thematic. They can deal with
esoteric issues, or work with abstract styles. But the transition to film
requires that the material be accessible to the general public.
A number of decisions can make the material more
commercially viable. Strengthening the storyline is a first step, for
audiences like a well- told story. A good story has movement and focus and
engages audiences from beginning to end. Most successful Indian or American
films have a main character who is likeable, sympathetic, and identifiable.
While watching a film we like to cheer for the protagonist, wanting the best
for this character and wanting him or her to achieve specific goals. We want
the protagonist to win at the end. As audiences, we spend considerable
emotional energy wishing this character success. This is quite true of the film
Guide.
A sympathetic character is not a necessity in
novels and plays, but it is something filmmakers look for when they are
considering material. That does not mean that a story with a negative character
cannot be adapted. There are several techniques that writers use to accomplish
this. Sometimes understanding is substituted for sympathy. In the novel The Guide, the characters Raju and Rosie
are ordinary persons with common vices. But in the film Guide, to appease the Board of Censors who might think that the
story is a sort of “glorified adultery” through Rosie’s liaison with Raju, the
character of Marco is substantially changed to create sympathy for the lovers.
The absent-minded archaeologist who leaves Rosie because of her illicit affair
is portrayed as “a drunkard and a womanizer who kicks out his wife”.
The cine-goer or cine-fanatic Indians do not
like their major characters to lose or to die at the end. We like happy
endings. Perhaps it is part of our idealism or optimism as a country. Most
Indian films show the villain getting his due punishment and the hero and
heroine living happily together. Part of making it commercial means knowing
one’s market. If one is aiming for the Indian marketplace, one needs to be
careful about the ending of the films. That is, filmmakers need to look
carefully at what kind of ending they have, and how they can make a sad ending
satisfying. We may also need to gauge the spirit of the times. In the novel The Guide, Narayan’s denouement is
ambiguous, open-ended. We get only veiled hints that Raju dies, and the rains
finally come. Narayan’s interest lies in the complexity of human psychology as
projected through Raju, and not in any simple moral fable about the reward of
goodness. The film, on the other hand, ends with pouring rain, and an elaborate
funeral, “to placate eleven financiers… who would not part with cash unless a
satisfactory mourning scene was added.” The business acumen of the financiers
here gets an edge over the sentiments of the writer. In case of films, ending
with the tragedy of the protagonists the filmmakers must make sure that there
is some other emotional centre in one’s story. They have to make sure that we
are not left grieving alone. There should be other characters who will grieve
with them and can help us understand the significance of death so it
becomes some higher victory. In Guide, the main character dies, but we see the
story through the eyes of Raju. We sympathize with him and go through an
emotional catharsis as we vicariously grieve with other characters over the
death. Moreover, his death for a greater cause – saving thousands of lives by
bringing rains from heaven through his penance and death at the end –
immortalizes him. The audience’s hero has now acquired the status of a ‘god’.
And this is what the audience likes. They don’t want to see their hero, often
played by their favourite star, to die. But if he is to die he must die as a
superman.
Creating a commercial and viable adaptation
means giving the story a clearer structure so that audiences can easily follow
it. The film is usually a one–time experience. There is no opportunity to turn back
the page, recheck a name, and reread the description. Clarity is an important
element in commercial viability, as far as the success of a film is concerned.
That’s why instead of following R.K. Narayan and making an ambiguous end to the
film, the Director Vijay Anand shows pouring rain in the village as the hero
makes his sacrifice, clearly sending the message to the audience that their
favourite hero by sacrificing his own life has come out as their saviour.
3.0 Reasons for the Box-Office Success of
Guide
Besides the
superb acting by Dev Anand and Waheeda Rehman, and the enchanting dances by the
latter, the scintillating music of S.D. Burman, songs rendered through the
golden voices of Lata Mangeshkar, Mohammed Rafi, Kishore Kumar, and above all,
S.D. Burman himself which contributed greatly to the grand success of Guide the bold decisions made by
Director Vijay Anand to make deviations as far as location, and the beginning and ending of the film are
concerned also contributed substantially in making this film a landmark in the
Bollywood film industry. All these decisions are, we can say, driven by
commercialism. We normally talk of a film’s success in terms of its business at
the box-office.
As we know, Malgudi is an
imaginary land in the southern part of India. The world of Malgudi is peopled
by common human beings living in a rural and semi-urban setting. They have
their common human virtues as well as common human vices. Raju is an ordinary
character of Malgudi but he is a popular tourist guide. The character of Rosie also is not glamorous
and she is of a dusky complexion. These ordinary characters of Malgudi have
been immortalized by superstars like Dev Anand and Waheeda Rehman. For the Indian audience, stardom plays an
important role in the box office success of a film. This was true with the film
Guide. A large number of audiences
turned out to see their favourite actors in the film. There was a fear that if
the roles were played by common people or not so popular actors, the film would
not have been such a box-office hit.
As Seger
(1992:4) comments it is important to remember that entertainment is show plus
business and producers need to be reasonably sure that they can make a profit
on their investment. There is a fine line between taking reasonable risks so
that original projects get made and making careful decisions by assessing what
has drawn audiences in the past.
Hence, we may say, one of
the main concerns of the filmmakers is to make their films commercially
successful. This is also true of Guide.
To make the film a box-office hit the filmmaker made certain changes in the
film. Whether it is changing of location, or making the characters glamorous,
or presenting the illicit relationship of Raju and Rosie something graceful or
changing the climax of the fiction, which infuriated R.K. Narayan. Hence, Vijay
Anand shifted the location to the exotic Udaipur in Rajasthan in North-west
India. Since the film was made in Hindi, the main bulk of cine-goers were
expected to be from North-India — which means India minus the four southern
Indian states. Moreover, the south Indian regional films are quite developed
and a Hindi film, howsoever good it may be, may not have attracted so many
South-Indian cine-goers, as the South-Indian films would have done. Again, we have
to bear in mind the fact that a Hindi film made with a South-Indian background
and cultural milieu was less likely to attract North-Indian cine-goers. So the
change of the location from South to North and the natural shift of the
cultural values contributed a lot to the success of the film because it
provided Vijay Anand the scope to fit into the film beautiful dance sequences,
with great lyrics and music which also attracted a great many audiences. Of
course, the shifts of location and the accompanying cultural values upset R.K.
Narayan in a big way. But Vijay Anand perhaps had no other choice in order to
make the film a great commercial success. If the film had been a literal
adaptation, it would have been a classic but it would have most probably run the
risk of a box-office failure.
R.K. Narayan’s closing of The Guide is quite ambiguous or what
Naipaul calls is a “Hindu fable”. That is, the reader is given the freedom to
decide his reading of the fiction-particularly the closing scene depending on
his personal attitude to things like swamis, miracles and power of prayers. But
in a theatre where a large number of people—people from all walks of life,
starting from the most illiterate to highly literate-–are watching the film
together an ambiguous or half-solved or puzzling answer would not have worked.
That is why perhaps Vijay Anand wanted to give a definite answer to the
audience that the fasting and the consequent death of their beloved hero have
brought about rains for the starving villagers. This not only satisfies their
typical Indian beliefs but also immortalizes their hero. Such an ending has
also a positive contribution to the box-office success of the film.
Conclusion
Based on our comparative study
of the novel The Guide and the
adapted film Guide we may conclude
here that there must be a reasonable balance between ‘Art’ and ‘Commercialism’
while adapting a novel – or any other literary work – for making it into a
film. There seems
BIBLIOGRAPHY
PRIMARY SOURCES
Krishnaswamy, N. and Krishnaswamy, N. The
Story of English in India. New Delhi: Foundation Books,Cambridge House
2006.
Narayan, R.K. The Guide. Indian Thought Publications,
Chennai. 2004
Guide, Dir. Vijay Anand. Nav Ketan
International, Film 1965
SECONDARY SOURCES
Anand, D. ‘Guided Missile’ in Film Fare March 18,1966:8-9, India.1996
Banerjee, S. and Srivastava, A. One Hundred Indian Feature Films: An Annotated Filmography. Garland Publishing
Inc., New York and London.1988
Beja, Morris. Film and Literature: an Introduction. Longman, New York and London.1973
Chatman, S. ‘What Novel Can Do That Film
Can’t (and Vice-versa)’, Critical
Inquiry (Autumn) (121-140). The University of Chicago, Chicago.1980
Chowdhury, A. Dev Anand: Dashing, Debonair. Rupa Co. New Delhi. 2004
Kaur,R. and Sinha,A.Z. (Eds.)‘Bollyworld: Popular Indian Cinema Through A
Transnational Lens’. Sage Publication, New Delhi. 2005
McLeod, A.L. R.K.
Narayan Critical Perspectives. Sterling Publishers, New Delhi. 1994
Mehta, Ved. John
is Easy to Please. London: Secker and Warburg. 1971
Monaco, J.
How To Read A Film. Oxford University Press, New Delhi. 2007
Raheja, D. and Kothari, J. (1996). The Hundred Luminaries of Hindi Cinema. Indian Book House Publications,
Bombay.
Saari, A. (2009). Hindi Cinema: An Insider’s View.
OUP, New Delhi.
Seger, Linda. The Art of Adaptation: Turning Fact And Fiction Into Film.
Henry Holt and Company, New York. 1992
Sen, K. Critical
Essays on R.K. Narayan’s The Guide. Orient Longman Private Limited, Kolkata. 2004
Sreetilak, S. (2007). Fiction In Films, Films In Fiction The Making Of New English India. Viva Book Pvt. Ltd., New
Delhi.
Srinath, C.N. (Ed.) (2000). R.K. Narayan: An Anthology of Recent
Criticism. Pencraft International,
Delhi.
Thoraval, Y. (2000). The Cinema of India. Macmillan, India.
Varde, A. (ed.) (1997). Stardust: The 100 Greatest Films of All Time. Magna Publication, Mumbai.
Walsh,W.(1982).R.K. Narayan: A Critical Appreciation. Heinemann, London.
Web Sites
www.ask.com ; www.bookrags.com ; www.dnaindia.com ; www.suite101.com ; www.upperstall.com ; www.wikipedia.org
Comments
Post a Comment