CIS in Sweden: The Changing World - A Multi Perspective Study of Ingmar Bergman and Satyajit Ray

This project deals with a comparative study of modern Swedish and Bengali Films through Bergman and Satyajit Ray. The legendary film makers were contemporary who dealt with their time and social changes. On many occasions, they chose a medium of storytelling and also a method of analyzing history and myths. Students are supposed to explore the ideas and the thought processes that worked behind their creations, from the perspectives of society, gender relationships and politics of their films:

From Bergman- Autumn Sonata

From Ray- Aranyer Din Ratri

Autumn Sonata:

Degradation of Family Relationships in the Movie Autumn Sonata- By Chandreyi Mukherjee and Ananya Bordoloi
The Role of Religion in Bergman’s “Autumn Sonata”- By Avishek Ganguly
The Mother-Daughter Relationship in Bergman’s “Autumn Sonata”- Devanshi Kothari
“Autumn Sonata”: Sexual-Emotional Identity-A Journey From Modernity to Post-Modernity- By Kohinoor Mukherjee
Feminism; is there a paradox?- By Stuti Guha Thakurta

Aranyer Din Ratri:

Next India - By Daniel Alf Rolén
My View of India After Watching Days and Nights in the Forest Movie by Satyajit Ray - By Jonathan Norgren
My view of India through Days and Nights in the Forest - By Hanna Ali
Movie analysis of Days and Nights in the Forest - By Felicia Johansson
Next India - By Zulhajat Saitova

_ x

Degradation of Family Relationships in the Movie Autumn Sonata:

By Chandreyi Mukherjee and Ananya Bordoloi

Like many of Ingmar Bergman’s best movies, Autumn Sonata is so intense in its emotions and so masterful in its presentation that world of characters absolutely overwhelms our senses and becomes for 92 minutes, the only reality we know.

Autumn Sonata contains so much pain and anger that it is not an easy experience to behold one’s emotions. From those very first scenes of reunion, Bergman and Ullman inhabit their roles completely. Eva’s face transforms from a doting awe of her mother to a nervous surveying of the preparations she has made for her mother’s visit along with Charlotte who in a single scene can massage her neck to convey her age and fatigue whilst darting her eyes around the room to take in her new surroundings.

The tone of their relations however, vacillates wildly from mutual love to paralysing despair, from forgiveness to rage. First, Bergman reveals hidden secrets in the house that makes Charlotte increasingly uncomfortable and makes Eva’s reasons for extending the invitation seem darker and more predatory.

The movie Autumn Sonata portrays a herd of relationships ranging from the prime relationship between the Charlotte and her daughter Eva to the minor relationships such as the one between Charlotte and Eva’s husband Viktor. Relationship is the pivotal subject around which the plot revolves. This movie not only puts forward various kinds of relationships but also shows the gradual regression in them. To start off with; the relationship between Charlotte and Eva is slightly ambiguous in the beginning as when the characters interact with each other it feels as if both of the characters are not on the same page. Eva is overly ecstatic about having her mother over after years as it seems and Charlotte subsequent to reaching Eva’s place feels extremely guilty of ignoring both of her daughters for the past decade. Both characters in this relationship are rather lost in their own conflicts with themselves so the relationship between them becomes brittle and fragile. The flaws in their relationship comes to the surface as the movie progresses, both characters try to suppress their past but in the end Eva breaks down and the past spills over their present and their relationship starts to disintegrate further more than it already has. Eva blames her mother for the ignorance she received during her childhood and Charlotte is surprised and taken aback at this accusation. This breakdown is elaborately shown in the movie with accurate flashbacks from Eva’s memory and the actors do a fantastic job in bringing out the raw emotions and feelings of both the characters.

However, Eva’s relationship with her sister Helena who is physically challenged is divine. Eva acts like the mother she never had, always looking after Helena’s health and her needs. Their relationship is much more well developed than Eva’s and Charlotte’s and it looks as if they understand each other regardless of Helena’s disabilities and this is one of the relationships that stand out in the movie as it does not collapse over the period of the movie but stays consistent on its own.

Nevertheless, Helena hasn’t had a best past either and Charlotte may be the reason for this cause. Helena too was ignored and neglected by her mother and didn’t gain the love and affection that a child should receive from their mother. Yet when Charlotte visits Helena after ages and Helena is elated by her mother’s presence, the same mother who refused to look after her after she was diagnosed with a disability, the same mother who ignored her all her childhood, regardless of these facts, Helena smiled with gentility as her mother entered her room. This relationship between Helena and Charlotte is also damaged due to Charlotte’s ignorance and this attitude of hers is almost palpable throughout the whole movie and further demonstrated when at the end of the movie, Charlotte once again runs away from her responsibilities and her daughter ending the story where it started, with her ignorance and cowardice to face life and reality.

Over all, almost all relationships brought forward in this film are frail but the story itself is built on a solid background and evokes strong emotions from the audience. It is heart breaking and a moving film which broadcasts the reality of people’s lives and their relationships. It depicts how weak and at the same time strong bonds between family members can be and also that an action of one member in the family can cause the whole family to fall into pieces. Ingmar Bergman is an excellent director who has brought out all these themes exquisitely well through the plot of the movie and also the characters.

_ x

The Role of Religion in Bergman’s “Autumn Sonata”:

By Avishek Ganguly

“Autumn Sonata” is a movie typical of Ingmar Bergman’s masterful style of direction which deals with the protagonist, Eva, somewhat resolving her childhood trauma while dissecting a troubled mother-daughter relationship to reveal the truths and reasons behind it all. However though it possesses the quintessential psychological predicament almost always present in Berman’s works, it differs in that Eva does not take the religious or spiritual route in overcoming it. It is almost as if the search for God has proved so futile that the protagonists focalize on the only left over aspect of humanity – a search for the self and the quest for meaning. Here religion and spiritualism or the search for God is almost completely ignored and it is the lack of this theme which attracts my attention.

Eva’s husband, Viktor, is a pastor in the local church. It is therefore ironic that Viktor is the one who chooses not to mention his son’s death while Eva is the one who reconciles herself to it. This shows that it is not religion which plays an important part in the movie but the personality and attitude of the characters which does. Viktor is a person who feels pain more readily than Eva whose hard childhood made her immune to pain and suffering or at least helped her to hide the outward appearance of it. The significance of the characters makes it difficult to theme or stereotype the movie while making it inherently unique among all of Berman’s works.

Eva’s monologue to her mother, Charlotte, about her feelings after her son’s death and how she believes her son will always be there beside her vaguely echoes a spiritual belief and is perhaps the only time religion or spirituality is mentioned as a tool to overcome emotional trials and tribulations. It also shows her belief that one can only be truly free after death as she herself has always been burdened in life by her childhood ordeals and has never enjoyed herself. She wanted her son to have a better life than she did and she believes that he has gained the freedom which she has never had after his death.

The whole movie can be looked at as a critique on religion. Charlotte, Eva’s mother, is a God-like figure whose visit is long awaited by her daughter, who could be seen as a disciple in this interpretation. The fact that the mother was rarely seen but her presence always deeply desired during her daughter’s childhood adds to the analogy of the mother to God. This viewpoint shows God as an ignorant omnipotent being who is too busy to acknowledge his children which are the humans who are desperate for his attention. The image of the mother coming down in her red dress shows her overwhelming presence and the condescension shown by Charlotte when teaching Eva how to play the piano piece was typical of someone superior to all around her, something we normally associate with the divine.

The lack of people outside the family creates a vacuum in which the movie takes place. This seclusion from the rest of society shows the separation from religion as society consists of followers of religion. Also though Viktor is said to be the pastor of a church, churchgoers or the church itself is not shown yet again highlighting the lack of importance religion has in the movie and the isolation of the few characters of the movie from the rest of the world. This isolation enables the focus of the audience to be on the interactions between the characters instead of central themes such as religion or spiritualism which is essential to the beauty and success of a film based on such a simple yet powerful idea such as the mother-daughter relationship. It allows the relationship to take centre stage and makes simple details such as facial expressions of Charlotte and Eva while they are on the piano more prominent and easier to notice. These smaller details are what make this film the artistic masterpiece that it is and displays Bergman’s aesthetic genius at its best. Perhaps this movie is religious because it’s all about the details and God is in the details.

The relative lack of spirituality and religion in comparison to what is Bergman’s norm helps complete the ‘Autumn Sonata’ on a high and creates an emotional drama where the characters dominate and break free of stereotypes and themes in a wonderful end to a movie as balanced and emotional as one of Chopin’s best.

_ x

The Mother-Daughter Relationship in Bergman’s “Autumn Sonata”

By Devanshi Kothari

"One must learn to live... My biggest obstacle is I don't know who I am.... If anyone loves me as I am, I may dare at last to look at myself." Ingmar Bergman's late 1970s masterpiece, Autumn Sonata begins with these delicate lines as husband Viktor introduces his wife Eva, by quoting from her first novel. Intriguingly, the sequence follows a melody that proves to be a quest for identity and acceptance. Autumn Sonata emplys naturalistic directing methods infused with bold philosophical ideas and two incredibly moving lead performances from the mother, Charlotte, and daughter, Eva (Ingrid Bergman and Liv Ullmann, respectively).

Its eloquence and intimacy are provided by Ingmar Bergman's well-written screenplay and recurrent extreme close-ups that penetrate the souls of the two women engaged in heated recollection. The film artistically unfurls gradually as a revelation of emotions and a confrontation of lost affections of childhood captured holistically in the muddle of patronizations and praise. It is achieved by twisting the idea of something so pure, for the naissance of a very post-modernist brainchild. Through the nocturnal discourse between mother and daughter, Eva is driven to utter, “ terrible combination of feelings, confusion, and destruction."

The musical integration in Autumn Sonata utterly sweeps one into the dichotomous performances of Chopin's "Prelude No. 2 in A Minor." At the moment of the mother's demonstration of the Chopin prelude, the camera fixates on both Eva and Charlotte's faces with such a humane intensity: I applaud Ullmann for maintaining such a convincing expression of awe and wonder- never moving, never blinking…always admiring. It is here that her whole chilhood is summed up- with just a look. The two solos that are played, first by the daughter and then by the mother, provide a glimpse of their characters as well. Charlotte's pianistic fanaticism and Eva's unrelieved devotion to winning her mother's attention are encapsulated in this gorgeous sequence. Eva’s style is so fluid, though she makes mistakes, one feels her lonliness and the confusion she suffers. Charlotte is precise, always encouraging technique over emotion, becoming almost harsh in places and thus bringing the audience back to reality. The contrast of the daughter's amateurish rendition with the mother's confident acuity exposes the oscillating mood of the film and raw honesty of the composition, which is beautifully painful. The performance is also the catalyst to Eva's profound thought and Charlotte's biting resistance. As acclaimed film historian Peter Cowie discusses in the film's commentary, Charlotte's total rationality is only concerned with outward appearances as she will not accept the fragility of the human spirit unlike Eva who is a more of a romantic.

Even before this notable debate that peaks two-thirds of the way through Autumn Sonata, Eva sparks several philosophical questions in relation to the afterlife, childhood and generational disparity in the first movement. Several years prior to the events of the film, Eva reveals that her son Erik drowned, and yet, Erik, strangely, has physically manifested in the body of Helena, Eva's terminally ill and crippled sibling. Helena exists primarily as a surrogate role, symbolic of the tortured repression and stunted development between Eva and her mother. When the fight between the mother and daughter reaches its climax, Helena falls out of her bed, gasping for air, and dragging her body across the floor to shout for help- much like the movement of a drowning person.

The words that are spoken deserve more than a mention, for they chill the audience. Eva’a softly spoken “you are a menace” to her mother after a much powerful confrontation keeps the audience bound and catatonic.
Freudian theory asserts itself when Eva points out that”… the mother’s unhappiness is to be the daughter’s unhappiness. It’s as if the umbilical cord had never been cut. The daughter’s grief is the mother’s secret pleasure.’’ Am inverted form of Electra Comlex is insinuated, further proven by the aggressive stance that Eva takes right behind her mother, resembling that of an angered lover. It is beautiful, it is revelling.. It is shattering.

Autumn Sonata is more than a one-dimensionally sentimental take. It ultimately teaches forgiveness and mercy in place of obstinance and self-importance, and only then may we begin to accept and understand ourselves.

_ x

“Autumn Sonata”: Sexual-Emotional Identity-A Journey From Modernity to Post-Modernity

By Kohinoor Mukherjee

The film 'Autumn sonata' by ingmar bergman, sexual emotional identity is most strongly expressed in the characters of Eva,Charlotte and Hellena, all female.

Throughout the film Eva's character shows little sexuality or emotions related to seuality, except for her childhood.In her childhood Eva was extremely concious of of her sexuality as is expressed in her disappointment with her mother for forcing her to cut her hair short,use braces for her teeth and other methods to change her appearance.Although she was extremely concious of hermother's reaction to her looks , yet, in her heart she ,like any other female liked to dress like what she wanted herself.Her wearing the red dress for the orchestra when she was 14 , her frustration due to her mother calling her a 'boy' etc...shows her passion for her sexuality in her childhood.

But her mother's interventions , culminating in her forceful abortion,along with frequent disruptions in her family life (earlier due to abortion and absece of motherly love;later due to the death of Erik) had completely shatterd her sexual desires-so much so that when Victor proposed to her she said that she 'did not love' him and that she was 'incapable of love'.Such lack of lust is also shown in her gestures and appearance ,ie.she does not dress passionately,lacks any jewellery,cosmetics,styling etc.throughout the film.

It is shown that Eva is mostly obsessed with her dead child and the philosophy attached to his life and death. She is also obsessed with suppressed memories of and anger for her mother as well as worries about lena's health .She mostly thinks about any of these topics. Sexuality and romanticism has very little place in her life.

In contrast,her mother's life is more colourful regarding sexual emotional identity.It also has contrasts.Her sexuality is more spontaneous and identifiable. She has a professional attitude towards life. She can live without her husband for months for her career, ignoring her sexuality. In contrast she can also be occasionally be unfaithful to him , as in her case with martin, and she can also defend such actions. Again in contrast to her independant nature in such matters she forces her own daughter to abort a child.

Unlike her daughter, she is concious of her sexuality-she dresses well in red clothes, jewellery and styled hair. Her gestures and addiction to cigarettes enforces this fact. She also has close, if not sexual, relationships with men like Paul, Leonardo, Adam, Schmeiss. Thus she has to deal with a number of men in her life. Her sexuality is also exposed in her music and her depth in understanding of male musicians' minds. Her choice of career is playing the piano and the romanticism involved in it also describes her sexuality.

Helena's character is also strongly related to her sexual emotional identity. Her mental and physical conditions can be attributed to the lack of sexuality in her life. Her sexuality had been aroused only once by Leonardo during their meeting. During that time, according to Eva, she had recovered from her illness almost magically. But the abrupt departure of Leonardo and the consequent absence of sexuality throughout her life worsened her health day by day.

However none of the male characters in the film, except for Leonardo, has a strong sexual emotional idientity expressed. But even Leonardo is dead from the beginning of the film. The other male characters like Joseph and Victor are overshadowed in their professional lives by the success of Charlotte in her career. They are very gentle unlike a rough male character and they are not shown as the biggest bread earners of the family.

In the post-modern world, professionalism, capitalism, influence sexual lives greatly. Charlotte's actions are defined by this post modern nature. But Victor and Eva are extremely bound by loyalty to each other. Eva is obsessed with existential philosophy related to life where there is little place for capitalism. Here is a contrast as Chartlotte belonging to the older generation shows post modern characteristics while Victor and Eva belonging to the younger generation follow older principles.

_ x

Feminism; is there a paradox?

By Stuti Guha Thakurta

First of all, what is ‘Feminism’? Feminism is a holistic theory concerned with the nature of women’s global oppression and subordination to men.

In this movie by Ingmar Bergman, if one is to analyse the character of the mother, Charlotte, from a feminist viewpoint, she will probably be seen as an independent and strong woman who has not been a helpless victim of patriarchy. She is a world famous pianist who has achieved name and status on her own terms, while being both a wife as well as a mother. Ofcourse, having completely neglected her daughters for years will probably be ignored by the feminists. Since they feel that they have often been subjugated to all sorts of criticisms on being a woman, such as -- ‘Man with his superior physical strength can better undertake the more strenuous tasks, such as lumbering, mining, quarrying, land clearance and house building. Not handicapped, as is woman by the physiological burdens of pregnancy and nursing…’ – as quoted by George Peter Murdrock. Thus, Charlotte’s professional success will be given much more importance by feminists rather than her personal failure as a wife and much more importantly, as a mother.

But if Charlotte’s character is analyzed from a more general viewpoint, it is difficult to overlook the facts that as a wife she had failed, as a mother she had failed and to sum it all up, as a woman she had failed.

Ever since Charlotte became a famous pianist, she had neglected her family completely. She would leave her daughter, Eva, with her father and go for piano concerts all over the world. But little Eva would eagerly wait for her mother to return, thinking maybe this time her mother would spend some time with her daughter. Eva would become so excited just a few days before her mother’s return, that she would start running a temperature! But it would be the same, every time Charlotte returned home. Charlotte would be busy with her own life…her own tours…her own concert. Charlotte had another daughter, Helena, who was mentally disabled.

But many years later, Charlotte comes to visit Eva. By this time, Eva is married and she has brought Helena to her own house to look after her, from the institution that their mother had put Helen into.

Now, when one starts to analyze the character of Eva, as a daughter, as a wife and also as a mother, there is a paradox as far as feminism is concerned because feminists had never supported the following ideas : Women produce children. Women are mothers and wives. Women do the cooking, cleaning, sewing and washing. They take care of men and are subordinate to male authority. But unfortunately or fortunately, Eva has fulfilled all the

above roles and duties – maybe not the bit about being subordinated by men but most definitely the others.

Eva, even though she was a journalist, she had divided her professional and her personal life and had given equal importance to both. She got married and had a son, Erik, whom she lost when he was just about 4 years old. She never stopped thinking about him even after he was gone. She would often sit in his room and go into a completely different world where she believed that Erik was still alive.

Then there was her sister Helena. The affection and love that Helena never received from Charlotte was provided to her by her elder sister, Eva. Not for a moment did Eva leave her sister’s side. She was always there for her, as a sister, as a mother, as a protecter.

When Charlotte comes to visit Eva, even though she is absolutely shocked to find her younger daughter living with her older daughter, she doesn’t express it. But one night when Eva and Charlotte engage in a conversation, Eva reveals all her childhood miseries and shares with her mother how much she missed her love and affection. At one point of time, Eva breaks down completely and says, “You said my hair was too long and you had it cut short, it was hideous! Then you thought that I had crooked teeth, and you got me braces, I looked so grotesque! You would buy me books and I would read them and not understand them, and you would make me talk about them, and I would always be afraid that you would show up my stupidity.” And Eva also asked her mother, “Are the daughter's miseries the mother's triumphs?”

I conclude by saying that, there is a paradox as far is feminisn is concerned but it does not include the mother Charlotte but her daughter, Eva mainly.

_ x

Next India:

By Daniel Alf Rolen

My assignment was to see a movie by Satyajit Rays and from that movie describe and analyze what kind of message that I get from India through this movie. This is what I will write about in this text.

Resume

The movie that I saw was about a couple of middleclass friends from Calcutta, they seem to want to give the impression that they are rich and powerful so they go to the poorer part of India and there they spend money. There they are treated with great respect by the poorer people, but it aint easy one ex is the so called bungalow they were living in was owned by someone else and they stayed there illegally bribing the gate keeper including others. Later they come across another middleclass family which they get to know little more throughout the movie, as time passes by it gets harder and harder for them to keep their identities hidden and money start running out. To make it worse one of the guys gets robbed in the forest and another falls in love with one of the middleclass women. It’s hard to determine who had the leading role because it was hard to remember all their names, back to the story it ends with them all going home in their car back home to Calcutta and their real lives.

Analysis

The characters in the movie for example the group friends the introduction and how you get to know their story was mostly in the car ride in the beginning. It also seemed that they truly didn’t show every aspect of them in the beginning. I think he wanted to show it through “action” throughout the movie instead of showing flashbacks he gives a steady stream that the characters are growing and changing but always keep something that you have seen since the beginning. I would say that its quite a difference between this movie and Swedish movies or western movies to be exact because they mostly like bring in the characters “story” quite fast and don’t very often let the character/characters grow through the movie.

I am a little unsure what to say is the purpose of this movie because since it seemed to have many important characters that had their own personalities and ideas. One idea is that he is trying to show how the people of Indians treat each other and how they feel about themselves. First a couple of worker class friends goes on a trip away from their worker life in Calcutta and come to a rich man’s life on the country side where the poor treated them with respect. when they were talking about going home they said that they didn’t want to and but if they didn’t work they wouldn’t get paid and they had to feed their families. In a way he tells us about India’s dream of becoming an economic power and Indians dreams of wealth. If this movie had been made by a Swedish director it would be made completely different way. For ex in India they are used to class differences but for a Swedish director it would be quite alien to him/her so they wouldn’t truly know how to make it work in the movie. Either they make it exaggerated or they would make look like it wasn’t a problem it’s hard to truly know it depends on what kind of person it would be. From a generalization about western directors, as said above they would probably exaggerate especially if their message was to illuminate the class differences in India. The movie felt like they kept the exact same amount of tension throughout which means they are quite different from western movies. For example where its always different amounts of tensions throughout the movie and then there is a climax when you are like dying to get to know what’s going to happen to the main character and etcetera. In this I didn’t find any climax it almost was like a straight line of some tension but still just a long red line of one amount of tension throughout the movie. One example is that when one the owner of the bungalow came and wanted them to leave the tension there felt no different from when one of the friends paid a woman to sleep with him in the woods where he later were robbed. Like I said what is typically Indian style if you wish is the long red line of the same amount of tension but other than that I cant really say whats typically indian because I haven’t seen many Indian movies. To talk about what’s good about this movie is strangely enough you might think is that it keeps that long line through the movie because then you don’t get confused about what's happening.

Closure

Alright now begins the discussion part. From this movie you actually surprisingly see a shocking view of india perhaps I exaggerate but it actually feels medieval in a way. Sure you should always treat people with respect but in the movie the poor called the group of friends if the translation is true, they called sir every time while the group of friends just yeah yeah your done go away. You get a feeling that the people of India are divided more so then just the cast system it’s seems that at least the middleclass up to the ruling class have become westernized. Normally this would lead to that you would want to rip down the class barriers but instead this has made as you saw with the group of friends and that family even though they were intruding a bit they were still welcomed in to their home. there you se the famous hospitality that India is known for but it’s is at least from my perspective from Sweden it feels like it’s a contradiction. Sure they have great hospitality but they only showed that hospitality to that group of friends because they thought that they were of the same class. If they had come in the same way but dressed as poor then they wouldn’t have been given the same hospitality so it gives you a quite negative view on india but not for the naked eye. You have to analyze but I must say when I came to this conclusion I wasn’t really surprised but I was certainly disappointed. One thing you could see throughout the movie was that they were practically saying money is the solution and this gives a negative view to India again that they are corrupt and money crazy.

_ x

My view of India after watching Days and Nights in the Forest movie by Satyajit Ray:

By Jonathan Norgren

The film is about four friends that are like brothers. They are searching for an escape from their regular lifestyles and habits within' the city. Their way of escaping is to travel as far away from it all as possible, so they go to the land of tribes. The tribe they end up in is the tribe Palamau, in Bihar.
After a long drive into the woods they find a place to stay by bribing the gatekeeper. Another relief for them is that they don't have to do anything, for example they considered whether to shave or not before going out. They even burn a newspaper to cut themselves completely out from the civilized world.
The main conflict in the movie is that they really try to get away from all the troubles from the city, Calcutta, and just find peace and relaxation. The troubles do not stop, when they get to the destination they have other difficulties with love and relationships with the natives in the tribe/area. Throughout the entire film, it is mostly about how they are falling in love, and how they are trying to make everything work between them.

The main characters are extremely easy to distinguish from the rest of the characters in the movie because the whole story is based on their point of view and what they are doing.

First we have the informal leader of the four friends, Asim, he is the one that does not have any economical issues of the four. Then we have Hari, a cricket player who has recently come out of a relationship. Thirdly is Sanjoy, it is a bit unclear of what he does in the film, however one thing is for sure, he loves literature. And then last but not least we have Shekhar, a humorous person who is wise enough to be the one that does not drink alcohol during the movie.

Then we have the three main female characters. An attractive women that unfortunately has lost her mother and brother, and now live with her step-father and her sister-in-law, Jaya, who is the second main character. The third character is a widow from the tribe named Duli.

If you think about it, the characters are not presented very differently from Scandinavian films or any other producers movies. They are actually presented in a very clear way so you really understand who they are, what role the have in the movie and what their personality are like. Just like any other movie.
Even though you can clearly see that the main characters of this movie are educated and from a higher layer of society and westernized because of the way they dress and talk. Sometimes during conversations they throw in a few english words which indicates their knowledge capabilities.

In my opinion, the message in the movie is that a country such as India; that has been dramatically affected by the colonialism and that you can really see the huge difference between the people that are in sore need of money and the people that are wealthy and westernized.
It is very interesting how the colonialism could create such a big difference between the people of India, and I think Ray illustrated that very well.

I do not think that the message of the movie would be presented in a different way if it was a swedish director or any other director to be fair. Of course the ethnicity and social background of the director would influence the movies message in their own way. There would not be anything noticeable really except small details. You can point out both what is different with this movie compared to a English or Swedish movie, and you can also point out what is similar.

This movie is from the 1970s and is not the kind of movie I usually watch, nevertheless for a movie from the 70s that was 115 minutes long, I was happily surprised that I enjoyed it really much. The conflict escalation in the movie is not that different from any other movie today that have the same genre.
The build-up of this movie is quite regular. It all starts when the boys meet the girls. And throughout the movie their relationships and love with each other starts to grow.

Asim and Aparna’s long and intense talk about the unfortunate loss of her brother and mother, but at the end of the conversation, a glimps of happiness when she gives him her address. Also when Jaya tells Sanjoys how she is feeling about him. And when Hari invites Duli out into the woods where they make love. On the way back out of the woods, Hari gets beaten by a servant with something like a bat or thick stick.

The movie ends with a humorous touch. Because of the boiled egg they have been urging to eat but couldn't get, they got by the girls as they drove away.

The movies that are more often seen today is more of Bollywood type of films, which this isn't.
I think this movie definitely is more realistic that most of the movies produced today in India, even though I haven't seen many movies about India produced by an Indian.
The language of the movie is really hard to distinguish from other dialects and languages in India, but I showed a clip of this movie to a friend and she said they talked something called Bengali. I don't know if it is true. But that is what she said.

What I think was really good about the movie was that you always can see beyond other people's flaws when it comes to love. It doesn't matter if you are poor or rich, nor if you are educated or did not go to school. As shown in this movie, you can clearly see that the love for each other unfolds quite quickly and they aren't even thinking about their differences.

And now for the final discussion. How has the movie changed my image and my point of view of India.

Well to be honest my thoughts about India has not changed much after seeing the movie. And why that is, is because of the lack of movies I have previously seen that are produced by an Indian producer and that is about this specific fashion. Of course I have been reading about India in school and about their history and their part in the colonial-history. But based on just the movie, my thoughts about India hasn't really changed.

But when I saw the movie, one thing came to mind. That was the high level of respect that the four main characters gave to the people from the lower class (lower layer of society). They were not unpleasant towards the locals and there weren't any sign of them treating another human being poorly or without respect. That is one thing that I thought was something common among a lot of the people from higher layers. But apparently, what I saw from the movie, that is not the case. The four boys had fun at a local carnival with al the people and they were having a lot of fun.

I assume that my Swedish background has something too do with why I think that. I suppose, that in Sweden we don't have that big of a difference in the “layers of society”. We all have it quite good here in Sweden, and that is probably why I thought that the higher class in India would treat the lower class differently, by that mean, with low respect and no consideration of the lower class people's feelings.
Something else that crossed my mind was that how the colonialism formed the different people in India and how that is shown in the movie. You can clearly see the difference between the people! The thing is that neither of the people, doesn't matter if they are from the upper class or a lower class, only have negative affects from it.

The people from the lower class has more of a cultural appearance apart from the people from the upper class that has more of an westernized touch. Which is good, because you need a mixture of both. But as always, there is an upside and downside to both forms of people.

_ x

My view of India through Days and Nights in the Forest

By Hanna Ali

Description: My task was to watch the movie "Days and Nights in the Forest" produced by Satyajit Ray. After I had watched the movie, I would compare the vision I had of India as a country and how there society works, with the vision I obtained after I had watch the movie. And look for differences between Swedish and Indian directors

Plot: This movie " Day and Nights in the forest" unfolds in early 70's. The story of the movie is about four friends, Ashim, Shekhar, Sanjoy and Hari who are the main character in this movie. They are from the big city Calcutta, but decides to take a short break from everything, and instead launch out on a short voyage to the forest. They bribe themselves into a bungalow with an old care taker with a very sick wife. During the period of time that they stay there they are living the life without any concerns about what people around them would think. They are rich successful people from the big city and the way they behave is wrong. They are drinking, dancing, and meeting new people. Somewhere treated badly, two of the friends falls in love and some interesting relations take shape.

The movie starts off with a scene where the guys are driving their car in to the forest. While they were driving we get to see a flashback on how things ended between Hari and his ex-girlfriend. They pull up to a gas station and the driver (Ashim) ordered one of the employees to fill up his tank. The driver asked one of the employees where he could find the nearest hotel. But some language difficulties occurred and they couldn't understand each other, so instead he asked the boy too get in the car so he could guide them personally to their destination. He told the boy that he would be paid generously for his help.

The main conflict in the movie is about the relations and how they change the people throughout the course of the movie. The four men who travel away from the city and the problems within it just find new once when they fall in love and bring their western ways out into the forest.

The main characters Ashim, Shekhar, Sanjoyoch Hari are barely presented at the start of the movie. But as the movie progresses we get to know them and their personalities on a deeper level when they adventure into the forest. If you compared his movie with typical Swedish movies, is not that different. The only different is that you already know what the story is going to be about and therefore you have a better understanding of what is going to happen.

My perspective is on what the purpose of this movie is. Is that different groups of people can cooperate and live together without any difficulties. They might buy there will trough but the still live together.

The director's message is that somehow the people from the upper classes can somehow treat people from the lower class how they want to get what they want. E.g. of this in the movie is when the four friends bribed the caretaker so that they could stay at the bungalow. Even though the caretaker new that he could lose his job and his action could have serious consequences. Swedish director often have a hidden message. They use quotes, effects, moments or scene that recurred. Is up to you as a viewer to figure out what the message is.

The dramaturgical model in this movie is more old fashion and it's not anything like typical Indian movies today. Typical Indian movie is more about the love, dance, joy, sadness, and have a happy ending. This movie is more like a mix of a western movie and Indian movie. In this film the excitement kicks in at the start of the movie when they weren't allowed to stay at the motel but still the manage to find a way to fix their problem.

Something that is great about this movie is that it had its ups and downs. Sometimes it was funny, boring, gave you a reality check. On one part of the story I felt like sleeping other parts made me cry and some made me laugh. I loved that it had different types of themes which made it a very interesting movie.

My view of India as a country didn't change. I just gained a new perspective of how things were under the 70s, for example I noticed that if you’re less fortunate, people could easily buy your will through. Especially under the period in which the country was under corruption. More people needed the money and whoever could afford to buy themselves anything and everything they wanted, they had the opportunity. I don’t think my non-Swedish background has any impact on what my thought were about this movie. My country isn’t known for producing movies. However, most of the movies I watch is made by Americans. So I have adapted some different points of view to look at when it comes to movies.

_ x

Movie analysis of Days and Nights in the Forest

By Felicia Johansson

My assignment is to analyze and interpret the Indian culture via the film Aranyer Din Ratri (Day and Night in the Forest) by Indian filmmaker Satyajit Ray.

Four friends from Calcutta venture out to the forests of Palmau for a holiday excursion in a car. They arrive at a little village in the state of Bihar. They have not made any arrangements for their stay when they come across a rest house. As they have not made any reservations they pay off the caretaker, who risks his job because he needs the money for his wife’s illness. The main characters are Asim, Sanjoy, Shekhar and Hari. Asim is the leader of the four friends. He has a nice job and owns the car the four friends drive in. Sanjoy is a timid person who always plays it safe. Hari is a cricketer he is very straightforward and during the movie he wants to forget the girl who rejected him. Shekhar is the clown of the group. He is unemployed and a gambler. The four young men are full of over-confidence of the big city and scant respect for the rural villagers. Their journey into the forests turns out to be journey of self-discovery.

The first night in the forest they spend in a local liquor shop getting drunk and Hari is drawn towards one of the tribal women named Duli.

The following morning while they debate if they should shave or not they spot some women from Calcutta. They locate the women’s cottage and introduce themselves to the family. Asim is interested in Aparna while Sanjoy gets attracted to Aparna’s sister-in-law, Jaya. Further into the movie a series of episodes reveals the characters. Hari makes love with Duli in the forest and the moments after he is assaulted by the servant Lakha who he accused for stealing his wallet. Meanwhile Sanjoy does not dare to respond to Jaya’s bold seduction while Aparna leaves Asim after giving him her address in Calcutta. The friends depart for the city the same afternoon, each with a better appreciation of life.

The first impression is that the four friends are from different castes especially Asim and Shekhar since one of them is rich and the other one is unemployed.

The characters are very different from characters in typical Swedish films. In this film the characters are more open and talkative. In most Swedish films and in the Swedish society in general, people are not very friendly and most of the people in Sweden mind their own business. A good example of that is when the main characters start to talk to the Tripathis family. Within minutes after the group had met the family they were invited to the Tripathis home. In the Swedish society that would be highly unlikely to happen since the Swedish people in general are not very hospitable towards others.

I think the message Satyajit Ray wants to tell is that despite different social statuses people can still have fun. A friendship weighs more than your social status in the society. A Swedish director had probably depicted the story another way since the Swedish society is a lot different than the Indian one. If the movie would have been directed by a swede the movie might have had a plot with four people with different jobs and salaries who would have been on a trip together. It would have been much more of a challenge to create a movie bases on the Swedish society since the Swedish social class system does not play a huge part in society anymore.

The dramaturgical model in this film is not like in a Swedish film or any western movie. A typical western movie spends the first half of the movie to build up the intrigue before something of importance happen. In this film the excitement kicks in in the middle of the film. And the whole first part of the movie is really slow to watch since nothing is happening except that we get to know the characters a little bit better.

I think this movie describes India as a country with a completely different atmosphere compared to the Swedish one. According to the movie, in the Indian society you can easily start a conversation with approximately everyone. Asking a complete stranger on how they are doing does not seem odd or strange in anyway, which would have been the case if it happened in Sweden. The movie also shows that people in India have a different mentality than people from Sweden. In India they have a friendlier attitude towards people they do not know. We have the “mind-your-own-business mentality” and if we are approached by a stranger who asks us something we tend to wince. Another thing that makes it more difficult to start a conversation with a stranger is that we most of the times have our earphones plugged in. It does not matter if we go by bus, train or car we always have music or a podcast in our ears.

Another thing that the movie tells in my opinion is that men and women are more equal than I first thought. The women in film take the same space as the men and they do the same thing e.g. playing badminton together. I have always believed that women were inferior to men. I think, as a Swedish citizen, I am used to hear that Sweden is one of the most equal countries in the world and as a conclusion of that I automatically think that the rest of the world are not even close to Sweden standards, especially not in a country that is still developing. That and the recent reports that Indian parents make an abortion if the fetus turns out to be a girl have given me a picture that India is not so equal when it comes to men and women. This film has however shown me the opposite image I have had about a woman’s role in the Indian society.

_ x

Next India

By Zulhajat Saitova

My task is to write a review of the film Aranyer din Ratri, which is directed by Satyajit Ray. I will also describe and analyze my view of India through Satyajit's films.

When I saw the movie and in which environment it took place, I thought that there was some kind of equality in India between men and women under the 70s in that particular environment the movie took place.

The environment was very isolated from other cities in India and that may cause the people care less about the cast system, Hinduism or the cultural norms and the usual standards that come with it.
I also think that it’s easy to buy you’re will through in India because the majority of the population in India are poor people and they cannot afford to say no to bribe. There for you can get everything in your way or anything you want in India as long as you have the money.
I noticed that the caste system was not included in the movie, for example I didn’t notice any male dominance because the women in the movie took as much space as the men did.

Example on equality: Gatekippers wife was seriously sick, and the four men asked for a breakfast which included more than just tea. Instead of going and trying to force his wife to cook breakfast for the four men with a higher status, he took into account her and explained her situation and offered himself to cook their breakfast. Normally, I would think that the gatekeeper would prioritize other men's wishes first.

Example No. 2:
Shekhar fell in love with the Mini and she came from a rich family. They started to date each other so their relationship would develop, like we do in the western. But, I don’t think that Shekhar would go out with Mini if she was from a poor family because her parents would give her away I marriage to Shekhar without asking her if she even wanted him as a husband. The reason her parents would give her away is because it will be one less person to feed and support. In this way, I think that if someone has good economics standard in India, they can avoid many religious or cultural rules.

The plot

The film is made in the 1970s and the title of the film (aranyer dim ratri) means days and nights in the forest.

The story is set around a group of four friends Arshvin, Shekhar, Lakha and Hari. The four guys are city citizens, and are on their way from Calcutta to take a week of. They stop in an area in the woods to take a vacation and tear themselves away from the city life. Forest rest house or so-called DFO is where they live during the movie. They bribed a janitor to stay there for a while.
During the days that they are living there, they drank a lot and talks about their previous relationships, two of the men fell in love with two women (Miss India and Mini).

The beginning of the movie is called appropriation. In this case it was the car trip to Forest rest house, where Hari had a flashback to his girlfriend and how they separated.

The main conflict: When the owner of the Forest Rest House discovers that the four men live in overtaken bungalow without permission from DFO

4). 4.1 I got to know the characters during the movie when the four friends spoke to each other or when they presented themselves to someone else I found out for example what their name was

I don’t think particular that there is a big difference between a western movie and Indian movie because I got to follow their journey during the days they were in forest. The story was told in a realistic way, with that I want to say that they had problems in their everyday life, and they drank alcohol as comfort. And the way they flirted with women in an open environment which is normally not usual.

4.2 I believe that the purpose of the movie is to show the differences between social disparities, and Ray’s message in the movie was to show how the higher classes are using those in the lower class to anything in their way. A clear evidence of this in the movie was when the four friends bribed the gatekeeper. I think that a Swedish director would also do in a similar way as Ray I mean in a way to the rich people can bribe the poor people because they know that the poor can’t afford to say no.

4.3 The dramaturgical model in this film is not like in a Swedish movie or any western movie. A typical western movie sets the excitement in the beginning of the movie while the Indian producer puts the excitement in the end of the movie, and puts the presentation of the characters in the beginning of the movie.

4.4 A typical Indian film according to me should include song and dance scenes in a special style. The main story would be that two people fall in love and they have to come over all the difficult substitutes. Of course must Sharuk Khan have the lead role? The characters should have traditional clothing and erotic scenes are never shown. It should also be exaggerated sound effects and fights scenes.

4.5 The good thing about the movie was that there were subtitles

Ending

India has a great impact on the population by their religion, culture, customs and norms but although there are still people who have a modern view on life whether they are rich or poor.

I think that we in the western and the most of Indian people have a big culture differences between us, and that may have caused big misunderstandings in our lifestyles. But cause of this film I noticed that there isn’t that big differences between us after all. Well I thought that they almost all lived by the cast system and it’s not true…