'SITA SINGS THE BLUES'............. Really??

It was the first time I came across American artist Nina Paley’s ‘Sita Sings the Blues’ when it was screened in one of our classes. This experience was quite different. I never had imagined that the Ramayana could be fused with and drawn parallel from a modern-day storyline from someone not having a similar cultural background as ours'. It is based on Nina’s personal life (for those of you who haven't see the animation movie). I found it surprisingly interesting as the depiction of the Hindu legend is quite American in nature. Nina has beautifully dealt with the subject of ‘women empowerment’ and ‘women emancipation’. Although an American Jew, Nina seems to have done some good research to arm her with the best material in order to make this animated film. Sarcasm, irony and mockery are the frequent elements pointing at the hypocrisy mankind lives in. But somewhere they also give away the fact how deeply wounded Nina is by her estranged marriage with her ex-husband Dave. 

Dave claims that Nina has been unfaithful to him, which she has been time and again vehemently denying and calling all of his claims as baseless. No wonder she chose this way of showcasing her broken marriage which began as pompous as the maiden voyage of Titanic and ended as disastrous as the Titanic’s sinking during her maiden voyage. It also makes us, or at least me, reflect on how our society still expects only the woman to sacrifice selflessly.

Nina seems to been deeply hurt by this reality of her husband abandoning her. The built up of the story through the Ramayana does show how different the social aspects of the society were then as compared to now, but it also shows the similarity in the human tendencies: a little gap of doubt kills a relation.

Music: Whenever Sita was portrayed as a singing performer in the film, through vector graphic animation; songs performed by the Jazz singer Annette Hanshaw lent the perfect vocals for creating those melancholy overtones.  

The songs also made me sympathise with what Nina has been going through or had been through in the past.

Another fact that caught my attention was that wherever bold and slick style of digitized animation software is used, there has been heavy use of rustic musical recordings, which ideally do not blend with the former. But here, this seems deliberate as it gives a subtle feeling of contrast between the past and the present. There has been a blending of the slick and bold style of digital animation software and the rustic musical recordings with the use of synchronized vocals, something that is new to me.

Animation: The three shadow puppets have portrayed the unimaginable complexity and contradictions; our human culture has reached, in a comical way pointing at the irony at places in the legend of the Ramayana. They also point at the fact how these complexities lead to misinterpretations and misunderstanding of history. They also break the monotony, which the film would otherwise have with only the past married to the present. It saves the animated film from being type casted, which draws parallels between past and present.

Another fact that took me by surprise was when it struck me the 3 shadowy puppets are derivatives of the contradiction-raising puppets of the ‘Chhaya Natak’ shadow theatre, which raise questions through discussion during the play.

Although I liked the film on the whole, there are aspects that are disturbing:

1. The portrayal of legendary respected figures in an inappropriate manner. (The enhanced body parts of Sita in the ‘American’ way.)

2. Use of inappropriate language by the 3 shadowy puppets is highly uncalled for. (Sita lived in a time where women had the right to choose their ‘Swayamvar’, and if not happy, they could move out of marriage according to the Vedas. It was Sita’s choice to stay faithful to Ram despite his suspicion on her and destiny did make him realize his folly though it was too late. Nina has no say whether Sita did the right thing, as it was Sita’s life and her choice. As legend says, Ram never accused Sita of unfaithfulness like Dave did to Nina.)

  

To Conclude:

Nina went overboard in venting her grief by humiliating those who belong to this culture. It’s not her fault as she has been brought up the American way and they are known to be notorious about hurting people time and again. There are strong reasons why many Hindus are against this film. The reason lies in the fact that the film raises many questions, answers of which are clear to Indians and may not be clear to rest of the world. Those who know Indian culture less may use this to interpret our culture rather than as a piece of entertainment. There are  many ways the film questions Ram on his perfection as God and human being: Did Sita’s fidelity matter? Yes it did, just the way it does in our times also. Was it correct on part of Ram to suspect Sita after her truth-test on fire? Ram and Sita knew each other very well from within. But since he was a king he could not afford people to question him for his sense of justice. So was his throne more important? No it wasn't, that’s why he left the throne without grief to be in the woods with his wife and brother. Hinduism advises to put duties above personal pleasures and relations. Was it right to make Sita suffer for Ram’s duties? Sita got the pain of separation but so did Ram. Ram had to sacrifice his lovely wife he got back after extreme efforts. Moreover, Sita was not helpless after the separation. She brought up her and Ram’s children in the best possible way. In a truly feminist state, women not only have the claims to rights but also the power and ability to uphold themselves. This may be tough for today’s feeble feminists like Nina to understand. Ram lost nothing but a ‘wife’... and a wife is everything according in a Hindu marriage. Ram’s separation with Sita was symbolic and he never married after that. For a king in India or abroad, it's important to have an heir. He knew he was losing that prospect as well. But Sita still sacrificed herself in the end… She was in a spiritual dilemma. She could not refuse her beloved Ram, when he requested her to come back. She could not go with him, as this could have otherwise initiated the practice of treating women as lesser gender. She rather chose to die to live up to her virtues. Sita’s sufferings have nothing to do with women rights, but Ram and Sita suffered because life is never easy for truthful people. That’s the reason they are worshipped as Gods. It’s highly unlikely to find such an ideal relation in today’s world so people tend to criticize the bygone for their own shortcomings. So, Sita and Ram both were great humans, while Nina had an estranged marriage so her reaction is understandable. But the way things were portrayed in a few sections of the film, was uncalled for. I suppose, we as Indians are responsible for this in a way as we don’t protect our own past or try to maintain it. 

My view may also generate the two halves the way Nina’s has. So, I have just put forth what I felt after watching this, though I’ll appreciate that attempt Nina had.

-------THANK YOU-------