The New York-based filmmaker speaks to The American Bazaar about his new movie.
By Raif Karerat
“Ka Bodyscapes” is the second Malayalam language feature film from Indian American director Jayan Cherian. The film centers around a love story that evokes a plethora of questions regarding civil liberties in India; its sexually-liberal tone and emphasis on women’s rights have subsequently drawn the ire of various right-wing factions who find the production too progressive. The film was denied clearance for theatrical release by India’s Central Board of Film Certification, citing that the film has “sensitive gay scenes, use of derogatory words against women and vulgar dialogues.”
Cherian, who is currently in India, said via email that an appeal has been already filed before the revising committee. “The chairman of the Board will watch the film with a larger committee,” he wrote, adding that “it will take time” before the panel makes a decision.
Prior to leaving for India, Cherian spoke to The American Bazaar from New York City, where he is based, on his motivation behind creating “Ka Bodyscapes” and the cultural paradigms he hopes it will challenge. Here are the edited excerpts:
What was your motivation for making “Ka Bodyscapes”?
The film is based around a same-sex relationship in India, specifically Kerala. I was following newer political movements in India, especially in Kerala, like the Kiss of Love Protest, the Queer Kerala Movement, and in general the people. Young people have started to express themselves in the streets and they are using their body as a tool of resistance. Against this backdrop I created a narrative using most of the activists who are on the frontlines — I started to generate a screenplay by interviewing real activists and dealing with the issues of the people. And from those interviews I generated a screenplay. Some of those activists even played themselves in the film after participating in the interviews, while there were also some theatrical artists and actors from Malayalam cinema.
So, I took this historical period, period of struggle, and superimposed a narrative on it. The goal of my film is to tell to capture this historical time and space, and to change what is happening throughout a very conservative, feudal, male-centric, heterosexual society.
Were there real-life incidents that inspired scenes in the film?
Yes, there are several, in Kerala particularly the “Bloody Napkin Movement” started when a girl was expelled from a bus because she was suspected of menstruating. A local journalist happened to be on the bus, Naseera, and she started a campaign to send napkins to the authorities. Then there was a factory in cochin, with lots of females working there and the authorities of the factory stripped their workers to find who was menstruating at that time, because they found a used napkin in the bathroom. It was humiliating and lots of activists began to campaign and later it became known as “Happy to Bleed” campaign all over India in connection with temple entry and everything. The center character of my film is played by this particular journalist and many incidents in the film are real that happened in her life. The queer population of India is facing lots of problems. Once they’ve come out they cannot go back. So lots of people in the queer community facing enormous distress right now. I wanted to tell their story, so the central story thread is same-sex romance between an artist who is trying to express himself and his model, but their exhibition is being attacked by the right-wing forces. Several incidents happened recently in India, and in the film I recreated all these events. I created a narrative in detail and superimposed it on the historical time period. That is the narrative technique used to make this film. In a nutshell the film is about three young people who are trying to find a space in a conservative Indian town.
Did you run into any issues with censorship or interference considering the controversial nature of LGBT-related activities in India?
Yes. The film is not yet shown in India because we don’t have a censor certificate. The world premier just happened in London. Next week we are going to plan a preview for our cast and crew in Kerala who have not seen it yet. And we are planning some small previews and private screenings. We are processing to get a censor certificate from central board and films division and it will take time.
Do you know what the timeframe might be for releasing in India?
That’s a good question but problematic also. It is difficult to get a wide release in India because traditional distributors are not ready to distribute films of this kind and right now we cannot talk to them at all because we don’t have the permission to show the film in India publicly. After we get our certification we will approach for public screenings and we are very happy to get a traditional distributor, otherwise we have to show it privately through activists and private screenings.
Do you think there is a chance that the government will not issue the censorship certification?
My previous film was banned in India which was more because of political reasons, but later after many cuts I got the certification. The censor board asked us to make 56 changes and per the film tribunal in Delhi it takes 8 months to re-certify, so we never got a chance to show the film. It is still illegal to show the film in its original form. The film is premiered in Berlin, Stockholm, and all over the world, but in India it has only been seen at a few small festivals, campuses, and all other private screenings. Even with a certification, they gave us a certification with cuts. When the government editorially intervenes in our personal work as an artist I felt very bad. It is not acceptable — censorship has no space in a democratic country or a democratic system.
What were the parameters you used to cast the film?
When I generated the script I took input from the living characters my characters in the film are based on. Some of them became my crew and they worked with me. Some of them don’t want came in front of the camera, and in that case I used theatre and film actors — some are experienced and some are not. Real people were also merged into fictional characters. The activists who acted in my film, most of them are acting as themselves and experienced the things that happened to their characters. It is a strange combination but the casting process was very much interesting, it was a lesson for me as a filmmaker because to mixing these trained and untrained actors, that was great experience. I’ve done it before for my former film “Papilio Buddha,” and it is very inspiring. For me as a film maker this was a great experience.
You mentioned “Papilio Buddha,” which is critically acclaimed now. Was there any difference between audience reactions to your two latest films?
People who watched this film in the festivals are mostly from queer community and people who are very liberal and very progressive, so we got enormous positive responses from the audience during the premiere.
How has the festival circuit gone?
I am humble for the enormous acceptance from the festival communities all over the world. Also, the film going to be shown in Italy and Brazil in May and several other festivals will be showing it as well. The premier was just the beginning, there is more to come!
Being that Kerala and Indian audiences can be very conservative, how do they receive your film’s messages?
I am not saying that necessarily Indian audiences are conservative, but mainstream Bollywood or Kollywood or the rest of the entertainment industry is very much romanticized. The narratives they are producing are kind of unreal, in a way they are creating very kind of a blemish-less, romanticized version of Indian life. So I am trying to create a counter-narrative which is what several other independent film makers are doing in India right now. The life we are portraying, or trying to portray is not often depicted in Indian films. We as a society are kind of very traditional, upholding very traditional. It is not Indian value system — right now we are talking about anti-sodomy law which was set in the 1880s by British people. India traditionally has had more liberal values — after all we created Kamasutra, We are people who worship Shivalinga in Balipeedha and we have tantric traditions in Hinduism and Buddhism. Sexuality is not a taboo in India. We consider the act of sex as a form of worship, especially in tantric religion. That being said all things fell apart during colonialism and I am not blaming everything on colonialism but unfortunately the Indian Penal code and the Indian value system now designed as this kind of 17th 18th century European morality and European ethics. We have very liberal mythologies but unfortunately we are losing that, we are people who created the Khajuraho temple and the Kamasutra, but right now we are propagating something other than the Indian identity and Indian values. We are propagating this Victorian morality and Victorian values as Indian values, and they are not really Indian. We are living in a kind of a colonial fixed frame in that sense.
Any closing remarks?
This is very important: we made the film for Indian audiences, not exclusively for Western audiences. Our concern is that we have to be able to put this film out there and it is a challenge for us to get it to the people. In India lots of things are happening, people getting killed because they are expressing themselves. It’s very sad situation and as a society we became more authoritarian and that’s what we all are afraid of. We have to have a society where everybody can express themselves and any artist can show their work publicly. We also need more art for the people and that’s what we are aiming for.