Chapter 5 Conclusion The study of “Franz Osten, Bombay Talkies and Varying Discourses in Early Indian Cinema” was undertaken with the purpose of examining the position of Bombay Talkies Ltd. Studio in the early Indian cinema culture. This study was also aimed at finding out how the international collaboration between German technicians (Franz Osten and Joseph Wirsching) and Indian artists (Himansu Rai, Niranjan Pal) created the symbolic capital for the people involved in the making of these films. This study focused on various activities of the Indo-German-British collaborations and its reception in India in the 1920s. The formation of Bombay Talkies studio in 1934 was the second phase of the collaborative effort. Two important aspects of the study are taken into account. The three silent films and sixteen talkies are studied for their historical relevance and how they contributed to the history of Indian cinema. The other aspect was the technical analysis of the films and the reflection of issues of modernity in these films. Himansu Rai and Franz Osten’s collaboration for making films is, probably, the only long lasting international collaborative effort in the history of Indian cinema. This collaboration started in 1926 and ended when the Second World War broke in 1939. Franz Osten being a German had to leave the British India and in 1940 Himansu Rai passed away. Bombay Talkies studio continued to make films till 1954 but in the absence of Himansu Rai and Franz Osten had lost its zest. These films made with collaborative efforts occupied a curious place in the cultural field. The commentators in the ICCR and the ICCE volumes do not deny that Light of Asia was technically a superior film but it was not considered an Indian film. Light of Asia earned great reputation to Himansu Rai and Niranjan Pal but in India, as one gets the impression out of the ICCR and ICCE, it was not very successful. To locate the importance and function of these films in the history of Indian cinema Pierre Burdieu’s method of relational network is being used. The archival research to study the silent films resulted in studying government documents like Evans’ Report on Indian Cinema published in 1921, Indian Cinematograph Committee Report and Indian Cinematograph Committee Evidence Volumes. Similarly to understand the relational mode of existence of the sound films 219 produced by Bombay Talkies, study of contemporary journals was undertaken. Film magazines like Filmindia, Filmland, Varieties Weekly, The Cinema were referred. The technical analysis of the films, as another important aspect of this research, was carried out using Gilles Deleuze’s two books Cinema 1: The movement Image and Cinema 2: The Time Image. Since Delezue’s books deal with the representation of movement and time, which separate film from other arts, their adequacy was never in doubt. The silent films and talkies being in the formative years of Indian film culture needed the kind of technical analysis that Deleuze’s books render possible. The first chapter of the thesis entitled ‘Some issues in Early Indian Cinema’, discusses the history of early Indian Cinema. The overview of the film history emerges from historical documents like Evans’ Report on Indian Cinema, A.M. Green’s paper, “The Indian Cinematograph Industry,” presented as proceedings of the ICC, ICCR and ICCE. Evans’ report clearly states that all the exhibitors catered to the small audience of European population who pay high prices for the attendance of the shows. Messers. Madan owned almost half of the cinema theatres and had monopoly over exhibition and distribution of the films. Madans used to buy the films outright with the already acquired economic capital. An interesting fact that comes out of this report is the circulation of film was completely dependent on the purchase of the films. Instead of a universal renting system, under which the renter obtains films directly from the producer and lets them out at competitive rates in the open market to exhibitors, there existed in Indian film business a system of purchase. The new entrant in the film business either had to buy the films in bulk, as Madans would do, or do not have any business at all. To change this scenario Mr. Green suggests the British government to have complete control over Indian film business. The government, suggests Mr. Green, has to control the import of the foreign films. Evans also suggests that for the growth of number of cinema halls the government should provide concession to the people and companies interested in building new theatres. On censorship issues Evans suggests the British government to censor films according to the regions they are to be screened in. Evans rightly takes into account the diversity of public and their sensibilities at this point. Evans’ report also brings to light the issue of undesirable films. By undesirable films Evans means films showing European women in bad light. He appears to be specifically pointing towards the American 220 films. Evans’ suggestion to British government to control the film activities in India highlights two points. The Britishers knew India was a good market for their films to be sold but it was completely captured by American films. Secondly they were aware of the educational value of films. Evans specifically recommends that the producers helped by the government for building theatres should be asked to exhibit educational films for a fixed period of time or on specific days. The narrative of the history of Indian cinema in many a versions considers Dhundiraj Govind Phalke to be the pioneer of Indian cinema. The reason for believing so most of the times given is Phalke’s claim of producing ‘swadeshi’ images. As Madhava Prasad claims Phalke’s nationalist agenda for making films considers a certain position in the cultural political field. This position taken by Phalke as a producer is later on taken by many others and stands exactly opposite to the silent and talkie films produced by Himansu Rai and Franz Osten collaboration. Kristin Thompson’s book Exporting Entertainment contends that before 1913 (the year generally marked as the beginning of the Indian film industry) it was Pathé who dominated the distribution and exhibition aspect of film culture. The Pathé prints, after being shown in theatres were sold to the travelling cinemas at half price. The mention of travelling cinema, by both Evans and Kristin Thompson, makes us aware of the lost history of travelling cinema’s exhibition and film viewing practice. However, during the years 1915 and 1916 American exports increased in numbers. The reason for this was the decline of industries of other nations. But films like Exploits of Elaine serial, Chaplin and Keystone comedies imported by Pathé were popular amongst the audience. However D. G. Phalke’s position in the early Indian cinema continues to be important for film historians like Ashish Rajadhyaksha. Rajadhyaksha forms his analysis of Phalke’s films and his position in the early Indian cinema culture based on two axes; modern technology and indigenous content. The Indian Cinematograph Committee Report and Indian Cinematograph Committee Evidence volumes highlight the need to look at the processes of production, distribution and consumption practices of film and its technology. In the absence of actual footage of the early Indian cinema, the documents related to the film practice in early twentieth century become important sources to get some ideas of early film culture. 221 The Indian Cinematograph Committee inquiry produced five volumes of written and oral interviews in which 353 witnesses were interviewed. The interviewees included people like educationists working in India, actors, film producers, exhibitors, distributors, newspaper editors and people from film censor board. The quality of Indian produced films and their content, monopoly of supply or exhibition of the films, system of block and blind booking, production and exhibition of films conforming to moral standards, sex films and crime films and their impact on the audience, films misrepresenting western civilization and operation of censor board were the major concerns of the film enquiry committee. The archival research shows that American cine journals like Variety, published in January 1928, were keenly following the film market and activities surrounding it in India. Priya Jaikumar’s essay “More than Morality: Indian Cinematograph Committee Interviews (1927),” suggests that the Indian Cinematograph Committee Report and Indian Cinematograph Committee Evidence volumes are important source for the study of film culture and power relations surrounding it. The audience in the 1920s was not a single homogenous community. Social hierarchies and class difference is evident in the interviews recorded in the Indian Cinematograph Committee Evidence volumes. It is possible to read these differences because by the 1920s film consumption for entertainment had already started establishing itself as an entertainment practice. The cultural divide amongst the audience based on their literacy was a result of the colonial educational policies. As Dass argues and is evident through the ICCE interviews, the illiterate audience preferred watching Indian mythological film, western comedy and adventure films. The western audience and the Indian elites preferred watching western socials. The development of cinema practice in India appears to be analogous to the development of cities like Bombay. The effect of modernisation in terms of industries and machines gets reflected through the growing consumption of cinema in the 1920s. The cinema halls catering to the lower-middle- class mill workers and the elites were divided according to the areas in Bombay. The cinema halls in and around Churchagate areas specifically served Europeans and elite Indians. On the other hand cinema halls in Dadar, Parel, Sewry and Bandra served the mill workers. By the end of the 1920s most of the major Indian producing concerns had started producing films with social themes.