The third of Deepa Mehta’s Elements Trilogy, and the
saddest, Water, like the other two, is a love
story set in India against a particular
socio-political background. Fire
(1996) explores a lesbian relationship –
so unheard of in India that Hindi has no word for it
– between two subjugated, unhappy women in today’s
New Delhi. Earth
(1999) documents the British-ruled
partition of India with Pakistan into religious
apartheid in 1947, and the doomed, secret love of a
Hindu servant for a Muslim. Water wends its
way deeply into the plight of Hindu widows in the
1930’s, at a time when Gandhi was simultaneously
leading a Nationalist rebellion against the British
and against some of the more hidebound Hindi
traditions.
Right-wing Hindu fundamentalist forces in India have
long been outspokenly opposed to Canada-based Deepa
Mehta’s humane vision and to her questioning of some
outmoded traditions. Water
is set in Varanasi, though the original
2000 filming took place
in Benares. It was so violently attacked,
the sets burned and destroyed, accompanied by death
threats to the stars and director, that Mehta
postponed filming for four years “until (my) anger
had passed”. She filmed secretly in Sri Lanka with a
fictitious name given to the production, resulting
in a setting that is lusher than the actual Varanasi,
yet serving to counterpoint the aridity and
deprivation of the lives of widows, required by
then-tradition to be sequestered in ashrams for life
and spend their time begging or praying.
Apart from an opening reference to ‘the woes of
widows’ in the Laws of Manu (1500 BCE), Ch 5, Hindu
traditions regarding widows are not fully explained
outright but unfold within the story in an organic
way. Eight year-old Chuyia (an impish, liquid-eyed
Sarala) is on her way to an arranged marriage with
an ailing elderly man when he dies. Her long hair is
shaved off and her father deposits her at the
widows’ house, his face distressed at what he knows
will be her life from this point on. The widows live
lives of enforced asceticism, atoning for the bad
karma that has killed their husbands. Their
unadorned white saris and shaved heads mark them for
all to see as inferiors. Apart from the rapacious,
grossly fat and tyrannical 70 year-old Madhumati (Manorma),
who runs the house, there are three inmates on whom
Mehta concentrates. They represent three aspects,
and three ages, of widowhood. Chuyia rebels and
chafes under her unwanted new existence, sleeping on
the ground, having one meal a day with no sweets. In
her 30s, Shakuntala (Seema Biswas, The Bandit
Queen) does her best through sincere devotional
practice to conform to her religion’s dictates. The
beautiful 18 year-old Kalyani (Lisa Ray) is kept
apart for other purposes.
Apparently the house does not receive any financial
support from widows’ families who have so
conveniently abandoned them. Madhumati, with
pragmatic logic, uses the offices of her best
friend, an odious transvestite pimp, Gulabi (Raghuvir
Yadav) to push Kalyani into prostitution, ostensibly
taking her earnings for the widows’ upkeep.
Kalyani’s status allows her to keep her magnificent
long hair and separate sleeping quarters above the
courtyard, where she also secretly keeps a
contraband puppy. Chuyia and Kalyani become friends,
but one of the film’s main threads is the effect of
both young Chuyia and Kalyani on Shakuntala, who
unlike any of the other women, can read. Being
educated also means Shakuntala can think for
herself. It’s a fortuitous situation most Hindu
women are traditionally denied, as they are also
denied inheritance of their dead husbands’ wealth.
Apart from young Chuyia’s arrival, the main catalyst
for change is in the person of intellectual Narayan
(John Abraham), who falls in love with Kalyani, and
she with him. Though it is traditionally frowned
upon to marry a widow, he asks her to marry him.
Narayan is a clear-eyed, independent-thinking man
who recognises the economic bases for many
ostensibly ‘religious’ teachings, while his father
and mother are traditional high-caste Brahmana for
whom the shame of marrying a widow is a cogent
force, despite the father’s utilising those same
economic inequities for his own benefit. For Kalyani
and Shakuntala, the possibility of happiness for a
widow is a nebulous shining bubble, an elusive
concept, and one which upsets the household in
unpredictable ways.
There’s an inexorable force within the screenplay
which leads both to a tragedy and subsequently to an
unexpected act of determined optimism, utilising the
hope for a new, more humane future for India
represented by Mahatma Gandhi. Much in the movie
also functions symbolically. There are aspects of
India personified in each of the main characters.
The presence of water in this film is a ubiquitous
metaphor for something ever-changing and ever the
same, as well as a powerful presence as a
life-giving, and –taking, element. The film is
beautifully filmed and scored by the same team from
both Fire
and Earth, cinematographer Giles
Nuttgens and composer Mychael Danna. Romantic
sentiment softens provocative social criticism in
Water
and so it resonates more deeply as a
heart-felt representation of inequities long taken
for granted as dubiously sanctioned by religious
teachings in an India of seventy years ago. There
are echoes today, underlined by the final caption,
in the lives of the 34 million widows whose social,
cultural and physical deprivations are still
affected by the sacred texts of Manu, as well as in
those fundamentalist factions which would silence
Deepa Mehta.