Akale: Deciphering the visual images from the past

Renjith T. R.

The transforntalion fl'orn one mode of communication to another ( always presents before us a whole lot of barriers, but when it comes to art fortlts. the transforntation is ntore over nrysterious than being problenratic, especially when \4re rewrite a literary work'on tothe screen, it is a miraculous senliotic transfbrtnatiott where a lot of additions and omissions'of signs tal

T lne Gta,s:; ll''lerragerie is a play by Terrnessee Williams that has worl nulrlerolls acclairrrs. Sliyanra Prasad in his ffrov ie Akctle has attelrrpted an interlingllal as well as an intersetniotic translation of The Glass Menagerie.The play is rvr,itten as a mertory play, ie; it is presented tlrroqgh the narration of Torrr, the protagonist remembering his past. Williams presents fottr characters in the play -Tont, his motherAmanda, sister Lauraancl the gentleman caller Jim.

Althou,*qh Shyama Prasad has tried to preserve the theme and feel of the play as far as possible, the genre shift has created a plethora of differences throughout tlre pla-y. He has transplanted the location of the pliy from America to India. which results in a change in the name of the characters as well as places, Tlte natne of the protagonist Tom changes to Neil, Amanda to Margaret, Laura to Rose and Jirn to f'reddy Evans.

One of the ffIain changes that we observe is in the title of the play The Glass Mlenagerie which tries to focus on the glass animals that Laura pampers, and whose presence is symbolic for the imaginery world into which Laura escapes from the unpleasant realities of existence. But Shyama Prasad though giving irnportance to tlre glass animals, shifts the focus ofthe title to the process of mernory by optirrg the title Akale which'has a cluster of meanings and associatiorrs. It can be a distance from reality which the characters rnaintaitl, or the distance between the real tirne and that of the

54 A ku I e : I )ac' i Ph a t' i rt tr1

The paper is an,attempt to analyse the creative transfbrmation that has occltrred while the verbal mode of commllnication in The Glass Menagerie changed into'the visual aesthetic's of Akale. While the play depends entirely on the selection of words, the film uses a plethora of devices like music, lighting, costumes and editingto convey the desired effect and thus can have a deep impact on the audience.

Cr-rltural untranslatability is the greatest challenge that we face while translating from one language into another. A whole lot of idiorns and phrases, whose roots are ingrained in a culture, can never be translated cofftpletely. ,ln such,cases only a paftial translation is possible. But when the translation far more is irrter'semiotic, it becomes complicated. :

i It is the same difficulty that a film maker has to face, while making a movie adaptation of a novel or a play. In the novel, the words or the verbal cotllmunication acts as an eye of the reader, The entire scene, setting, costurxes, lighting, and emotions need to be communicated through the help of words. Tlre readervisualizes the entire scene based on the description of the',writer. But when it comes to movie, the main challenge of the filmmaker is to recreate the entire scene on the screen. The verbal medium makes the reader active by engaging him in recreating the visuals in his mind, where as the cinematic apparatus puts the responsibility of creating the visuats on the filnr mal

' As the auteur theory states, it is the film maker, who is the author of a filrn. Only if the director is able to visualise the entire sequence of events in his mind, he willbe abte to do justice to the story that he adapts on to the screen. The film maker need to make a lot of creative effort to recreate the story in a three dimensional space. And in the process, he has to face a numerous problems involved in an inter seffriotic translation.

Ilere, in the rnovie Akale, Shyama Prasad has not only attempted an inter seffriotic translation, but an inter lingual translation ofthe play T'he Glass menctgerie by Tennessee Williams. He has translated the entire play from an American backgronnd to an Indian setting. But the directorhas deviated very less from the same, both in the play and the movie. It needs almost the same creativity or even more to recreate a story in a different space and time than creating a new one. I*lere, we see that Shyama'Prasad has successfully adapted The Glass menagerie on the scene with a screen with a different setting, characters and the title, but yet processing the V[1RI]AL TO VISTJAL: TII[: Alrs'f llh.l'lc SEMIOl'lCS OI; CLr\SSICS AS MOVI[S

stoi:yline and feel of the story. Tlre nlrnterous awards and critical acclaim, tlrat the filtn won is a proof f or its creativity.

The ntost intportattt cleviation that the filmrnaker has taken is in the title of the r1'lovie, shifting the focus of attention fiom the Class menaserie to the clistanc e (Akatc)wlriclt acts as a rnetapltor to show the distance between tlte real tirne and tlre tinre in u,hiclr tlre play take place ttrrough the narrative of Tonl as well as the distance between the real world and the irnaginary world irr which the characters live detached frorn the pains of existence.

Again as we analyse tlre opening scene of the movie, we see that the filnt maker has tal

Bttt, the original pla,v begins with a soliloquy by Torn, where lre colrlpares hirnself to a magician ("Yes, I have tricks in rny pocket, I have things Llp my sleeve. But I am tlre opposite of a stage magician. He gir.s yoLl illrrsion that has the appearance oftruth. I give you tr:uth in the pleasant disgrrise of illusion."). This soliloquy reminds us of the basic function of any art form, ie; an attempt to express or realise the truth. But Shyarnd Prasad, thouglr he omits the soliloquy. has wonderfully crafted out a new scetle in'the place of, tlre soliloquy and presents the protagonist as a professional r,vritel', writing lris own story.

Another techrrique tlrat \ve see in the play are inter titles, also *Legerrd ref'erred to as on screen" wllich appearc ai the beginnirrg of eaclr bce'ne. They are dratnatic techniques use,C to convey the overalt rnooA of the play or the thentes presented in each scene. They appear at the beginning of each scene. The lnost itnportant irrter title is a line by French poet.Francois Villon "Ou sont les rreiges?"' which mean t'( Where are the snows of yesteryear?" . Tlris line can convey the entire mood of the play in one lrlolxent. But the filmmaker was not able to include the line in the movie, because inter lingual ancl irrter seffriotic translations alr,vays presents suclr barriet's which are difficult to overcome even by an experienced filmrrralcer.

In the use of tnetaphors. tlre film was able to clepict on to the screen, those images, tlte u,riter conveyed througlr his writings. The glass menagerie of Rose, especially tlte unicorn, is the most irnportant metaphor used in the

56 .r t t l'. l - tlovie. It is actually a symbol of Rose. As she conveys through her dialogue with Freddy, the unicorn is so fragile yet distinguishes itself from the other glass animals. Rose also is very:fragile yet according to Freddy, has a character and purity that distinguish her from the common people. But in the end, the unicorn falls down and breaks its lrorn. In the satrle way the life of Rose also ends in a tragedy, all her dreams being shattered in a moment.

Another recurring irnage in the movie is that ofthe gentleman caller. It is s nletaphor which stancls for the dreams that are present in each individual. Although we have many problerns in ollr life, we always expect sometlring good to happen in our lives. But sometimes the dreams doesn't happen as we expect. This is what happens in the story too, where the dream gets shattered. The photograph of Tom's father who left the home is also another irnage that is frequently used, to show the lost prosperity of the family. Finally when Tom leaves the home after quarrelling with his mother, t6e i,i',ug. of Amanda and Laura standing still is shown through the glass blurred by the rain water. It is apainful irrrage from the pastthat ties buried ' in Tont's memory. Such irnages always lies buried in the psyche of each individual. Equally impoftant is another irnage of Rose carrying the candle. The fihn tries to convey through such images that. it is not easy to escape from one's past. As Tom says " we can live a new life only by forgetting the

One of the rnajor attractions of the movie is its background score which presents nufflerous possibilities compared to the play. Music can communicate more than the words do. In the lrlovie Akale, lnusic plays an important role in showing the time difference between past and present. The Ltse of, gramophone record by Rose takes us to another time period during which the narrative takes place. The movie doesn't have any songs altlough an ar.rdio release ofthe movie was done later, with songs resembling the mood of the movie. The major criteria that separates a movie from the verbal communication is its technical aspect. In tlre movi e Akale, its art direction, costumes and the sepia tinted irnages by the cinematographer has been of great help in lending authenticity ao the Anglo Indian setting of the 1970 The costunles of Rose and Margret stands in wide contrast where Rose's dressing shows her shy and fragile nature. while that of Margaret showsher love for youth and charrn. As the play happens in tlie memory, the,sepia tinted images have helped a great deal in conveying the necessary mood in

57 i

VERBAI. TO VISUAI-: 1T{E AL,S'T}{E].IC SF I\,{IOTICS OF CI.,ASSIC-S AS MoVIES

The dialogtle presentatiolt in the movie goes almost parallel to t6at of the play. Btlt to sttbstantiate the loss that has taken'place while translating the dialogttes to Malayalant. ttre lilrn maker has added certairr dialogues which not only has nteaning irrsicJe the movie, but even outside it. In the opening scene, Neil's u'ife rvhile conversing with him, tells in reply to lris statelnent "l want to tvrite the truth"....that "Truth can never be wrirten., it can only be lived". It is sintilar to the views expressed by Plato that art is tlrr"ice removed frorn realify. When we try to perceive reality through writi6g, tlre words automatically corlceal the truth. :

The play encls with a soliloquy by Tom which is followed by his Ieaving the ho,lue after quarrelling with Amanda. Through the soliloquy, he narrates his later life, whence lte leaves his horne in search of forturre. It ends with the heaff totrchirrg lines rvhere he asks Laurato blow of hercandlei nowadays rvot'ld !... the is lit by Iightningl Blow out yor.rr.candles Laura..) because the memory of Laura still haunts him in his present life.

Shyanra Prasad lras also taken lris freedorn in recreating the final 'scenes of the movie, rvhich differs f,rom the original play.The movie goes on to show tlre ftttttre Iife of atl characters. Neil accidentally sees the gentleman caller Jirn, his old friend and invites him to his home., wlrere Margaret, his mother now old lives her all charms being [ost, She alEo narrates the.tfaSic story of Rose r,vho died seven years &So, following a nervous attacl<. Yet Shyarna Prasad has visualised the final lines of the soliloquy withour losirrg its chann.

Con clusion

Practice of adapting the verbal mgdium of novels and plays into the visual medium of movies is very common from the tirne films gained prominence. But the semantic cltange that happens can affect the art form both in positive and negative wayr. fn. visual medium hu"J;; ;;;.;rt possibilities of employing setting. music, lighting, costumes and editing can intensely triggertlte effect ott the readerthan tly using a verbal medignr] But yet a verbal mediunr can inspire over rnind which is the greatest canvas, irrragine pictures tltat can excel any technology.So, I hereby cotrclude rny attempt to present before yoLt the aesthetic shift that happerred during the senl iotic transforntation of tlre classic play The Glass menageriea6v' ,v intorrrl., theL mov ig Akale.

58 Akale: l)cciphuin5i

Bibliography

r Nichols, Bill. Movies and Methods. Berkeley: University of California Press, I 977.

. Cohen, Marshall. Mast, Gerald. Film Theory and Criticism, New York: Oxford University Press, 1974. -

o Miller, Toby. Stam, Robert. Film and Theory: An Anthology. New Jersey: Black Well Publishers, 1999.

. Pamela Hill John. Film Studies: Critical Approaches. Gibson. Church. - New York: Oxford University Press, 2000. '

o Eco, Umberto. The Semiotic Threshold, The Hauge: Mouton, 1973.

o Andrew, Dudley. Andre Bazin. The Major Film Theories: An Introduction. New York:

o Metz, Christian. Film Language: a Semiotics of the Cinema. New York: Oxford University Press, 1976. ooo

'l

a 59

a

q 2 ?