Ser­ge Daney, “Le tacot de Ghat­ak”, first published in Libé­ra­ti­on, 31 Octo­ber 1986.

Trans­la­ti­on from the French by Arin­dam Sen & Iva­na Miloš.

It is a love sto­ry set in Ran­chi (at the bor­der of Ben­gal and Bihar). Bimal unre­ser­ved­ly loves Jaga­t­dal, who returns his affec­tions. He is a taxi dri­ver and Jaga­t­dal his vehic­le, a very old Ford. The laug­hing stock of his neigh­bour­hood, ira­sci­b­le drea­mer Bimal avo­ids all human cont­act except for one child. We are in 1959, a time when modern cars are making their appearance in India. Bimal has no fond­ness for them; he loves, yells at, repairs only Jaga­t­dal, the decr­e­pit car, the pile of metal that breaks down, ago­ni­zes him and howls and screams in love and pain.

Ajantrik Ritwik Ghatak

It is a sto­ry that makes litt­le sen­se. As in many Indi­an films, the­re are always neigh­bors and «fri­ends» who attempt to reason with Bimal on human-machi­ne rela­ti­ons. It is a was­te of time. The­re is wit­hout a doubt a reflec­tion of Ghat­ak in Bimal’s per­so­na­li­ty (enac­ted by Kali Baner­jee with frow­ning eye­brows): someone who nee­ded to expe­ri­ence the real (or the unre­al, as in the case of the Ford) befo­re «crea­ting» some­thing with it. And who, like a pati­ent figh­ter, took his time. «As an artist,» Ghat­ak said in 1964, «I can­not record TIME. It advan­ces slow­ly, in our subconscious.”

Time does not hold the same mea­ning for Ghat­ak as for Satya­jit Ray. Ray is an aris­to­crat, Ghat­ak was an agi­ta­tor. Both are Ben­ga­li, but Ghat­ak was born in 1926 on the «wrong side» of Ben­gal, in Dec­ca, not yet capi­tal of East Ben­gal, later Ban­gla­desh. Ray knows how to evo­ke the past in mists and clouds. Ghat­ak, on the other hand, is a man with a clean sla­te. The­re is no nost­al­gia in him, or rather the­re is a nost­al­gia so strong (for an undi­vi­ded Ben­gal) that it is ever­y­whe­re and nowhere.

Ajantrik

By pro­lon­ging Jagatdal’s useful­ness bey­ond its limit, Bimal goes against the law (of both kar­ma and mecha­nics). The­re is revolt in his stub­born­ness, but he will gain some­thing from it in the end. After one last attempt to mira­cu­lous­ly pro­long the vehicle’s life (a final act of love), Jaga­t­dal breaks down, and a gree­dy, mole-eyed scrap mer­chant offers to buy it by the kilo. Sud­den­ly, the sound of Jagatdal’s air horn is heard – a child has picked up the object tur­ned toy. A tear runs down Bimal’s easi­ly exci­ta­ble face. It is as if the direc­tor had repla­ced the abs­tract law of kar­ma with the human recy­cling of matter.

Ghat­ak, a lef­tist, a loser and alco­ho­lic (he died in 1976 in pover­ty), is the one who, much more than Ray, the young Indi­an gene­ra­ti­on rela­tes to. He is a man given to frag­men­ting who takes the time to try and put the pie­ces back tog­e­ther. This is why Ajan­trik is a film that brea­thes. Some­ti­mes with ter­ri­ble asth­ma, some­ti­mes with mira­cu­lous ease.

In the histo­ry of cine­ma, the sound ali­gns the film with the old tra­di­ti­on of the silent “murm­ur” of the thir­ties, while its nar­ra­ti­ve asso­cia­tes it with the tra­di­ti­on that has been libe­ra­ting nar­ra­ti­ve from the shack­les of screen­play from neo­rea­lism to the nou­vel­le vague. Bimal’s sto­ry is pre­dic­ta­ble enough, but the story’s land­scape is made up of the unex­pec­ted, of dig­res­si­ons, and waking dreams. On Jagatdal’s final jour­neys, we even pass genui­ne bits of late ‘50s India. As for the sound, it is com­po­sed like a radio score fea­turing clas­si­cal music (Ali Akbar Khan), tab­las beats, metal­lic clan­king and air horns wea­ving a can­vas bet­ween dream and reverberation.

Ajantrik

As the clun­ker wea­k­ens, the sto­ry takes flight. Engi­ne fail­ures allow for chan­ce encoun­ters. And then the film chan­ges direc­tion, trans­forming into some­thing dream­li­ke. On the day Jaga­t­dal embar­ras­sin­gly stalls on a nar­row moun­tain road, drum beats are sud­den­ly heard. Bimal rus­hes down a slo­pe and arri­ves at a reli­gious cerem­o­ny with advan­cing dancers who impart a sen­se of unre­al, as in Murnau’s Tabu. Bimal is lost; he gets drunk and disappears.

We want to fol­low the dancers, we catch bits and pie­ces of what they are say­ing. We learn that Ghat­ak lived five years among this tri­be (the Oraons of the forest) and that the idea of a few shots was enough for him to make his film. Cine­ma was once ter­ri­bly open to what was not cine­ma. This was, in all likeli­hood, the cine­ma of Ghatak.