ISSN: 1550-7521

All submissions of the EM system will be redirected to Online Manuscript Submission System. Authors are requested to submit articles directly to Online Manuscript Submission System of respective journal.

The Representation of Class Conflict in Cinema and Violation of the Fundamental Rights: A Study in the Context of Satyajit Ray's

Jyotsana Sinha*

Department of Mass Communication and Journalism Babasaheb Bhimrao Ambedkar University, Lucknow

*Corresponding Author:
Jyotsana Sinha
Department of Mass Communication and Journalism Babasaheb Bhimrao Ambedkar University, Lucknow
E-mail: [email protected]

Received: 02-Jan-2023, Manuscript No. gmj-23-86147; Editor assigned: 04-Jan-2023, Preqc No. gmj-23-86147; Reviewed: 18-Jan-2023, QC No. gmj-23-86147; Revised: 23-Jan-2023, Manuscript No. gmj-22-86147 (R); Published: 30-Jan-2023, DOI: 10.36648/1550-7521.21.59.345

Citation: Sinha J (2023) The Representation of Class Conflict in Cinema and Violation of the Fundamental Rights: A study in the context of Satyajit Ray’s “Sadgati”. Global Media Journal, 21:59.

Visit for more related articles at Global Media Journal

Abstract

This study focuses on the representation of the cast system in Satyajit Ray’s cinema (Sadgati) and the violation of Fundamental Rights. In this study, the researcher has used visual analysis (mise-en-scene) and three-dimensional critical discourse analysis to examine the text, tone and expression, and socio-cultural background of the different characters and the violation of the Fundamental Rights of a man who is suffering from untouchability and exploitation. Dr. Ambedkar devoted his life to the welfare and empowerment of the marginalized class. He desired to bring equality within the social structure, where no space for discrimination on grounds of religion, race, caste, gender, and place of birth. This study attempts to identify the reflection of Ambedkar’s ideology in the film “Sadgati

Keywords

Dr.B.R.Ambedkar; Sadgati; Caste System; Critical Discourse Analysis; Mise-En-Scene; Untouchability

Introduction

Cinema is considered a reflection of society and Dr. Ambedkar is the one who has given a new vision and way to society. He imagined a country in which, every person is equal before the law and everyone has the same rights. No one is superior and no one is inferior. He was appointed the chairman of the Drafting Committee of the Constitution of India. Ambedkar believed that the Constitution should be used as a tool for social reformation and that it would help in equalizing the gap between different classes. Thus, he felt, was essential for social solidarity and national integration. To bring equality in society Fundamental Rights are mentioned under part III of the Constitution of India. On the other hand, the versatile director Satyajit Ray believed in such cinema, which connected with society and reflect the issues and reality of it. Major issues in society have always been portrayed by the cinema. We can see the correlation between society and the cinema. In the year 1981, the Hindi film ‘Sadgati’, directed by Satyajit Ray, based on Munshi Premchand’s heartwrenching short story, is a mirror of society. The researcher has selected the film “Sadgati” for the analysis because it successfully portrays the conflicts in the cast system. And it somehow reflects Dr. Ambedkar's ideology about the caste system [1].

Research Objectives

1. To figure out the difference in the portrayal of two classes of the society through the film “Sadgati” by mise-en-scene.

2. To analyse the discourse, if any, which points out in the direction of discrimination and untouchability faced by the lower caste in the film “Sadgati”?

3. To identify, if any, the Fundamental Rights which have been violated in some manner.

Research Questions

1. How does the film “Sadgati” differentiate the two classes of society with their living standards?

2. How the film, “Sadgati” used discourse to perform the discrimination and untouchability in society?

3. Are the Fundamental Rights violated in different scenes of the film “Sadgati”?

Methodology

This study is analytical and exploratory in nature. The Film Sadgati has been selected for the visual analysis (mise-en-scene) and critical discourse analysis to acertain of scenes wherein Fundamental Rights have been violated and the apex of pain and agony can be seen. This study is based on Norman Furlough’s model of critical discourse analysis [2].

A: Visual Analysis (mise-en-scene): The film “Sadgati” has so many visuals that express the social class of two different casts. One family belongs to the lower cast and another family belongs to the upper cast. The researcher has done mise-en-scene (placing on stage) analysis of the visuals. This research has been focused on two aspects of Mise-en-scene -

1. Sets and Props

2. Costuming

Setting and Props: The Setting of the stage and the props which are used, with the help of these things we can visualize and feel the emotions of the story. In the film, Sadgati props and sets have been used in such a way, that audience can differentiate the class structure and social background of the upper caste and lower caste of the society. Dukhi and his family belong to a lower caste, so they face discrimination and exploitation. We can see a clear difference through the sets and props. Dukhi has a mud house, which is covered by pantiles on the top. His family is using old crockery of aluminum. In a scene, Dukhiya was going out to call Brahmin for his daughter’s engagement rituals without having anything. His wife Jhuriya was running after him with an old aluminum plate and glass to feed him but he denied it. It reflects their misery [3, 4].

Dukhi is a poor hardworking man, who cuts grass. On the other hand, Brahmin and his family belong to an Upper caste, so they are living prestigious life. Brahmin live in a huge paved house with his wife and son. He has a cowshed, where do the cows live. In a scene, he was drinking water with a copper jug (lota) and having lunch with stainless-steel utensils. It symbolizes that the priest Ghasiram’s family has better living standards than Dukhi. The wife and daughter of Dukhi are making plates and mats for the priest with mahua leaves. So, he could do the rituals without interrupting the caste system. Otherwise, the priest will deny to come and doing rituals. In the climax scene, Ghasiram uses a wooden stick to pull the leg of Dhukhi’s dead body and tying up with a rope for dragging it. In this way, he avoids touching Dukhi’s corpse. The wooden stick and the rope are pointing out his untouchable behavior. After that, he comes with a copper pot (lota) and sprinkles the holy water for sanctifying the place, where Dukhi has died (Figure 1).

global-media-Dress

Figure 1: Dress has been an important aspect.

Costuming: “Dress has been an important aspect of the mise en scene and film directors have used it to their aesthetic advantage to communicate to the audience about the narrative by creating characters and cultural constructs. Conceivably one of the most important functions of dress is to be able to provide identification of the wearer in terms of his/her background, social strata, economic worth, position in society, and occupation.”

As the film starts with Jhuriya, played by Smita Patil, wife of the village low caste tanner Dukhi. Jhuriya has draped a plane brighthued pink saree, in a way where the hemline of the saree ends below the knee to assure that she can carry on with her day laden with physical work with ease without impeding her work. She is having a necklace, which looks like some old silver coins are tied with each other with black thread. This attire reflects the outfit pattern of low caste women depicting her social class. Her daughter Dhaniya is wearing an orange top and she has draped a dhoti on her waist like a skirt, which is just below her knee. She is wearing a locket (tabeez) in her neck. The apparel of Dukhi is a White dirty dhoti, a short kurta with color faded gamachha He is wearing a black thread on his neck with a locket and some red plastic pearls. This is How Satyajit Ray has portrayed the lower caste of society [5].

Ghasiram, who belongs to the upper class, wears a saffron dhoti and saffron scarf on his shoulders, a pattern on his feet, and a sacred thread (janeoo). He applies sandalwood and kumkum tilak on his forehead. He is a priest and all these things are symbolizing his status in society. His wife drapes a white saree with some reworks on the border of it. It looks sophisticated. Ghasiram's wife's character as an upper-caste Brahmin's wife is established through dressing up with a white saree and his son is also wearing a white kurta and dhoti, signifying purity (Figure 2).

global-media-ritual

Figure 2: Showing ritual prescriptions concerning the manner of dress.

There are ritual prescriptions concerning the manner of dress, the cast mark, and so on. These restrictions and prescriptions symbolize different styles of life and serve to mark out the different status groups which are their bearers. Although status groups are a feature of societies of different kinds, nowhere are they so sharply defined as in the caste system. This is in large measure owing to the attachment of elaborate rituals values to the pursuit by different castes of different styles of life.

Critical discourse analysis and the violation of Fundamental Rights

Norman Fairclough has given the model of critical discourse analysis to understand the role of language (both written and spoken) regarding the socio-political structure of discourse. Critical discourse analysis has three dimensions: textual analysis, discursive analysis, and social analysis [6].

i) Textual analysis: it includes verbal or visual texts and the kind of language used-vocabulary, cohesion, bias, and rhetoric.

ii) Discursive analysis: It is mainly focusing on tone and facial expressions.

iii) Socio-cultural analysis: It focuses on the socio-cultural background and conditions which govern the process. Use of words, phrases, and sentences and their relevance in a social context.

Scene 1: (Conversation between Dukhi and his wife Jhuriya when he was cutting grass)

Dukhi- “Think about what he’s going to sit on.” (unko baithayegi kahe par ye soch)

Jhuriya- (coming closer to him)- Won’t he sit on a cot? (Khat par baithenge na)?

Dukhi- “Not on Ours surely.” (Hamari khatiya par)?

Jhuriya- “We can borrow one from the headman” (Mukhiya ji ke yahaan se mang layenge khaat).

Dukhi- “Are you crazy?” They won’t let a lump of coal out of their house to light your fire with and they’ll lend us their cot? (pagla to nahi gayi?....aag jalane ke liye angaar to milta nhi aur wo khatiya de denge)?

Jhuriya- “So?” (Phir)

Dukhi- “Tell Dhania to break off some Mahua leaves and make a mat with them.” (Dhaniya ko bol mahuye ke patte tod laye or uski aasni bna lenge).

Jhuriya- “Very well” (Thik hai)

Dukhi- And we’ll have to offer him some provisions too. (Pandit ji ko seedha bhi dena hoga).

Jhuriya- We’ll need a plate for that. (Uske liye to thali lagegi). Dukhi- Make a plate with mohwa leaves. They’re holy. (Wo bhi patto ki bna le. Mahuye ke patte bade pavittar hai).

Analysis of the scene

Textual analysis- Dukhi and his wife consider themselves untouchables. They find mahua leaves are purer than them.

Discursive analysis- The tone of Dukhi reflects that he is disappointed but habitual of this kind of untouchable behavior by the upper caste [7].

Socio-cultural analysis- Dukhi and his family live in a society where the caste system is followed actively. People of the Upper caste maintain distance from the lower caste people. they neither want to sit on their cot nor want to eat in their crockery. This system is still followed in some places.

This conversation reflects that Dukhi and his family are facing discrimination and untouchable behavior by the upper class. According to article 17 of the Constitution of India, “Untouchability is abolished and its practice in any form is forbidden. The enforcement of any disability arising out of “Untouchability” shall be an offence punishable in accordance with law.” In this way what they are facing is a violation of their fundamental right.

Scene: 2 (Conversation between Dukhi and another deprived man while he was trying hard to chop a tough wood with empty stomach)

Another man- “Can’t he feed you even if doesn’t pay you? Ask him for some food…” (To kya wo tumhen khana bhi nahi de sakte, bhale hi paise na de. Kaho na unse)

Dukhi- I’m asking a favour to come to my house, how can I ask for food? (Ghar chal chale yahi kya kam hai. Khana kis muh se maangoo).

Another Man- Then Whack away (To phir chalao kulhadi).

Analysis of the scene

Textual analysis: “Can’t he feed you even if doesn’t pay you? Ask him for some food… (To kya wo tumhen khana bhi nahi de sakte, bhale hi paise na de. Kaho na unse…)” this sentence presents the cruelty of the priest towards Dhukhi.

Discursive analysis: Dukhi’s facial expression says about his helplessness and tiredness that eagerly need some food but can’t ask for it. Another poor man has empathy with Dhukhi and he is surprised to see that Priest is neither giving money nor giving food and forcing him to hard work under the deadly sun [8].

Socio-cultural analysis: The discourse between them expresses that they are a part of such a society in which the lower caste is exploited by the upper caste. Dukhi’s words are showing that he wants Priest to come along with him so he is doing whatever he wants. If the priest will deny to come along with him then how could the date of her daughter’s marriage will be fixed. Dukhi is considering it as a favor and he has no courage for asking for food. This demand might get upset the priest.

The words of Dukhi show that he is unable to cut that wood because he is so much hungry and tired. He was in hurry to come to the priest, so he had no time to take any food in the morning. To take the Priest along with him, he was doing everything that the priest wanted. The priest makes Dukhi carry out a series of tasks under a burning and intolerant sun. The poor man, who has just come out of a fever, completes all the tasks without any objection. Here we can see the violation of article 21 and article 23 of the constitution of India. Article 21 deals with the protection of life and personal liberty. “No person shall be deprived of his life or personal liberty [9].

Except according to procedure established by law.” And according to Article 23, “Traffic in human beings and begar and other similar forms of forced labour are prohibited and any contraventions of this provision shall be an offence punishable in accordance with law.” These two Fundamental Rights of Dukhi have been violated by the priest Ghasiram in this scene.

Scene: 3 (Ghasiram is having lunch and his wife is moving hand fan for him. Suddenly Dukhi has entered into their courtyard, asking for some fire for his tobacco)

Ghasiram’s wife to Ghasiram “You seem to have forgotten all about caste rules. All are just walking in as though they owned the house. Tell him to get out or I’ll scorch his face with a fire brand.” (Tumhe dharm-karm kisi baat ki sudbudh nhi rahi.. Hindu ka ghar nhi hua koi saray huyi. Usse kah do ji..chala jaye nahi to luhati utha kar muh me lga dungi).

Dukhi- “Forgive me, mother. It was very wrong of me to come inside the house. It’s because we’re such fools that we get kicked about.” (Maaf kare maayi, badi bhool huyi mujhse jo ghar ke andar chala aya. Itne moorakh na hote to laat-joota kyon khate).

Analysis of the scene

Textual analysis: The wife of the priest is using the casteist remarks for the lower caste Dukhi. She is humiliating him. She is also complaining to her husband (Tumhe dharm-karm kisi baat ki sudbudh nhi rahi. Hindu ka ghar nhi hua koi saray huyi. Usse kah do ji.. chala jaye nahi to luhati utha kar muh me lga dungi). This statement of her expresses how much she dislikes the entry of lower caste people into her home. There is a feeling of guilt in Dukhi’s statement. He is accepting that it is his fault and he should not enter the home.

Discursive analysis: There is a mixed expression of surprise and aggression on the face of Ghasiram’s wife. Of course, there is a warning in her tone. Dukhi’s expression is very miserable and there is a guilt in his tone.

Socio-cultural analysis: Ghasiram’s wife is typically following the caste system. Her words express that she believes that lower castes are untouchables. They can’t enter the house of the upper caste people. Ghasiram’s wife is angry with Dukhi, but she is complaining to her husband not directly saying any word to Dukhi. Here we can feel a boundary between the two of them. The first is caste and the second is gender.

In this scene, Dukhi is fronting untouchability, so again Dukhi’s fundamental right (article 17- Abolition of Untouchability) is interrupted by the priest’s wife.

Scene:4 (Conversation between Dukhi and Ghasiram, when Ghasiram saw Dukhi is taking nap started shouting at him for this)

Ghasiram (Yelling at Dukhi)- “Dukhiya! What’s the matter?” (Dukhiya! Kya hua?)

Dukhi (being tormented by hunger)- I had nothing to eat this morning. (Subah se kuch khaya nhi maharaj).

Ghasiram- “So what? Finish your work, go home and eat all you like. (Looking at the wood) The wood is lying there just the way it was.” (To kya? Kaam poora krke apne ghar jana aur khana dat ke. Lakdi jyon ki tyon padi hai).

“So if you don’t find an auspicious day for your daughter’s marriage. Don’t blame me. Come on, get going.” (Phir sait bhi vaise hi niklega. Mujhe dosh mat dena. Chalo shuru karo).

“You seem to have no strength in your arms. Hit hard! Don’t stop until you’ve split it.” (Hath me jaise dum hi nahi hai. Laga kas ke! Han han ke marna jab tak lakdi fat na jaye).

Analysis of the scene

Textual Analysis: Here the priest Ghasiram is using very harsh and cruel words. The weak and hungry Dukhi is just entreating with a shivering voice but Ghasiram’s words do not get softened. Ghasiram is forcing Dukhi to use more strength and energy in cutting wood.

Discursive Analysis- There is a wave of anger on his face and his tone is very loud which is threatening Dukhi. On the other hand, starvation and tiredness are visible on the face of Dukhi. He is feeling dizzy and can’t even stand properly under the scorching sun [10, 11].

Socio-cultural analysis: Ghasiram’s behavior is completely insensitive and inhuman. He is ruling and yelling at Dukhi. “The source of knowledge of all rituals and mantras is Vedas, particularly Yajur Veda for rituals. Only Brahmins were originally entitled to learn Veda and practice the rituals because only Brahmins had the required qualities and qualifications for it.” When we see the social background, Brahmin is considered on the highest level in the caste system. This consideration is reflected in the behavior of Ghasiram, he measured himself as superior and Dukhi as inferior. At that time the priests were as honourable as God. And the priest Ghasiram was taking advantage.

In this scene, Ghasiram is scolding and forcing Dukhi to work hard until his last breath. In this way, The Fundamental Rights under Article 21 “Protection of life and personal liberty”, and Article 23 “Prohibition of forced labor” of Dukhi have been disrupted by Ghasiram.

Scene 5 (After Dukhi died, another poor man, who has seen the exploitation of Dukhi, addresses his community members)

He died while chopping wood. The Brahmin forced him to work. So, he is responsible. He will come here. He will ask you to remove the corpse. Don’t touch the corpse, or you’ll be in trouble with the police. It’s a police case and the guilty one is the Brahmin. (Lakdi cheerte-cheerte hi womar gya. Inhi Bahman devta ne jor jabardasti usse kaam karwaya. Isliye jimmedari unhi ki hai. Wo yahaan ayenge, tum logon se murda uthane ke liye kahenge, lekin unki ek bhi mat sunna, Lash ko chhoona bhi mat nahi to police pakad ke le jayegi. Ye police ka mamla hai, kyuki inhi brahman devta ne ye sab kiya hai.)

Analysis of the scene

Textual analysis: The lower caste people are calling Ghasiram “Brahmin Devta”, which means the priest Ghasiram is respectable to them as God. But his cruel behavior towards Dukhi, makes them angry.

Discursive analysis: The poor man’s face is full of rage. While addressing the villagers, we can see the glimpse of protest in his eyes and can hear the high pitch in his voice.

Socio-cultural analysis: A Brahmin priest can’t touch the dead body of a lower caste man. After Dukhi’s death, Ghasiram wants some people who can remove the dead body from his premises.

How can a Brahmin touch a corpse of a lower caste man, it is against his socio-cultural status.

Scene 6 (lamentation of Jhuriya at the door of Ghasiram after hearing the news of her husband Dukhi’s death)

Maharaj! You made him chop wood, made him work so hard when he had fever only the other day. He had nothing to eat this morning, he had no strength, yet you made him work. What harm has he done to you that you were so cruel? (Maharaj! Aapne usse kadi mehnat karwayi, usse lakdi chirwayi, jabki wo abhi abhi bukhar se utha tha. Uske pet me khana nhi tha, badan mein takat nahi thi. Usne apka kya bigada tha jo aap itne nirdayi ho gye.)

Analysis of the scene

Textual analysis: She is expressing her pain in mournful words

Discursive analysis: Dukhi’s wife Jhuriya is crying badly and blaming Ghasiram for her husband’s death. She is tearfully asking the reason for his cruelty. She is knocking and dragging on the door of the priest.

Socio-cultural analysis: When Jhuriya was crying out with rage and running toward the priest’s door, His wife immediately shut the door so that Jhuriya can’t get inside. Even in this oncogenic situation, Priest’s wife is worried about untouchability and their social prestige, which might get affected by Jhuriya’s entry.

In the last scene, Ghasiram is all alone pulling the corpse of Dukhi by a rope. But still, he has the feeling of untouchability toward Dukhi, so he pulls up one of Dukhi’s legs with the help of a wooden stick and has tied it with a rope. He is very careful during this process that his hands shouldn’t touch the dead body. In this way, Ghasiram is hauling the dead body with all his strength, maintaining the untouchability and caste system. He has dumped the corpse in a dirty deserted place, where skeletons of animals are also thrown out.

Analysis of the scene

Textual analysis: This scene has no text Discursive analysis: Lines of tension and tautness are visible on the face of Ghasiram. Sociocultural analysis: This is a shameful task for him to pull the corpse of a Dalit but he is helpless. Because Dukhi’s death is his fault and no one is ready to take away the corpse. So he is dragging the corpse by himself. Despite being guilty, he is still worried about untouchability.

Dr. Ambedkar’s ideology for the caste system

Castes in India: Ambedkar wrote this research paper while he was at Columbia University, USA, in April 1916. It was published as a book in 1917. The book throws light on the origin, structure, and development of castes in India. Ambedkar considers caste as a closed group that is self-contained. According to Dr. B.R. Ambedkar,“ Caste in India means an artificial chopping off the population into fixed and definite units, each one prevented from fusing into another through the custom of endogamy. Thus the conclusion is inevitable that Endogamy is the only characteristic that is peculiar to caste, and if we succeed in showing how endogamy is maintained, we shall practically have proved the genesis and also the mechanism of Caste.” The caste system originated from the custom of endogamy and everyone followed this without knowing the reason behind this. In Satyajit Ray’s film “Sadgati”, the caste system is in the dominant form and everyone is following it whether they like it or not. In the end, the culmination of evil and cruelty has been seen.

Annihilation of Caste: Published in 1936, this is Ambekar’s best-known book. The Jaat-Paat Todak Mandal (The Forum for Breaking the Caste System) had invited Dr. Ambedkar to deliver the presidential address at the organization’s annual session at Lahore in March 1936. However, when the organizers saw the draft of the Ambedkar’s speech, they got cold feet and requested Ambedkar to make changes in it. But Ambedkar refused pointblank. Later, the speech was published in the form of a book in 1936. The book is only a few pages long but is thought provoking. Dr Ambedkar dwells on how to annihilate caste by attacking its very roots. He says: “If you have to breach this system, you have got to apply the dynamite to the Vedas and the Shastras, which deny any part to reason; to the Vedas and Shastras, which deny any part to morality. You must destroy the religion of the Shrutis and the Smritis. Nothing else will avail.” Dr. Ambedkar faded up with the caste system, discrimination, and untouchability and he well thought out the root cause is the religious literature of the Hindu religion, therefore he wanted to destroy them to bring the equality in society.

He wanted to abolish the monopoly of a single caste on the position of the priest. He advocated, “It should be better if the priesthood among Hindus was abolished. But as this seems to be impossible, the priesthood must at least cease to be hereditary. Every person who professes to be a Hindu must be eligible for being a priest. It should be provided by law that no Hindu shall be entitled to be a priest unless he has passed an examination prescribed by the State and holds a sanad from the State permitting him to practise. No ceremony performed by a priest who does not hold a sanad shall be deemed to be valid in law and it should be made penal for a person who has no sanad to officiate as a priest.”

The Untouchables: This book, published in October 1948, dwells on how untouchability originated. Armed with credible evidence, Dr Ambedkar has written that “ The untouchables are usually regarded as objects of pity but they are ignored in any political scheme on the score that they have no interests to protect. And yet their interests are the greatest. The socio-religious disabilities have dehumanized the untouchables and their interests at stake are therefore the interests of humanity. The interests of property are nothing before such primary interests. If one agrees with the definition of the slave as given by Plato, who defines him as one who accepts from another the purposes which control his conduct, the untouchables are really slaves. The untouchables are so socialized as never to complain of their low estate.”

Untouchability is a curse for those who face it and of course for the whole society as well. It is against harmony. In the film, “Sadgati” Dukhi and his family belong to a lower caste and they have challenges like poverty and discrimination but the biggest challenge before them is untouchability. As Babasaheb discussed – Untouchables are so socialized as never to complain about their low estate. In this way, Ghasiram is imposing a series of arduous works on Dukhi without paying and feeding him, and even after this Ghasiram is bearing in mind that Dukhi is an untouchable man. In spite of this, Dukhi is not complaining about anything.

Conclusion

The film “Sadgati” is so much realistic that a viewer can feel the pain of a poor Dalit man and his exploitation by the priest Ghasiram can bring tears to the eyes. In the film, “Sadgati” such props and costumes are used which helps in identifying the difference between the two castes and their social status at that time. For getting the answer to the first research question, the researcher has analyzed the (mise-en-scene) props and costumes that are used for the upper caste and the lower caste. For the portrayal of the upper caste- copper pot and stainless steel utencils for having food, huge paved house for living, saffron and white clothes with sandalwood tilak on forehead and umbrella in hand while walking on the road, indicates the living standard of the upper caste. On the other hand, living in a mud house, using old utensils and Mahua leaves for having food; above ankle length costume with a specific type of necklace indicates the social status of the lower caste in the film “Sadgati”.

For getting the answer to the second research question, the researcher has used critical discourse analysis to examine the discourse of the characters. The researcher has found that for being a lower caste man, the protagonist Dukhi used to face abuse. He is being called by the name of his caste, especially by the upper caste villagers. The casteist remarks are often heard in the film. The sentences of the priest and his wife are full of unkindness. The priest's wife gets offended by the entry of Dukhi into their premises. On asking for some fire by Dukhi, She throws a piece of fiery coal upon him and indirectly warns him, not to come again.

The constitution of India guarantees the protection of Fundamental Rights of Indian citizens. There are six Fundamental Rights from Article 12 to article 35 under part three of the constitution of India. In different scenes of the film, “Sadgati” various Fundamental Rights of Dukhi have been violated. After analyzing the different scenes of the film the researcher has got the answer to the third research question. So, the disrupted Fundamental Rights are-

Article 17- Abolition of Untouchability (under Right to Equality article)- “Untouchability” is abolished and its practice in any form is forbidden. The enforcement of ant disability arising out of “Untouchability” shall be an offence punishable in accordance with law.

Article 19 A- Freedom of speech and expression ( under Right to Freedom)- All citizens have the right to freedom of speech and expression.

Article 21- Protection of Life and Personal Liberty (under Right to freedom)- No person shall be deprived of his life or personal liberty except according to procedure established by law.

Article 23- Prohibition of traffic in human beings and forced Labour (under Right against Exploitation)- Traffic in human beings and begar and other similar forms of forced labour are prohibited and any contravention of this provision shall be an offence punishable in accordance with law.

Munshi Premchand’s famous work “Sadgati” written in 1931 and was also adopted by the filmmaker Satyajit Ray in 1981with the same name. Both the works are a masterpiece in their fields. Satyajit Ray has adopted it after 50 years of Premchand’s writing and has done a great job to justify every character and scene. This film talks about the caste system of India and Dr. B.R. Ambedkar is the one who did unforgettable revolutionary attempts to abolish the caste system and empowerment of the suppressed classes. His ideology and works will always be relevant for the upliftment and awakening of society.

References

  1. Roy A (2003) the Doctor and the Saint. New Delhi: Navayana Publishing Pvt. Ltd.
  2. Google Scholar

  3. Ram N (2008) Ambedkar Dalits and Buddhism. New Delhi: Nice Printing Press.
  4. Google Scholar

  5. Beteille A (1996) Caste Class and Power. Oxford Printing Press.
  6. Indexed at, Google Scholar

  7. Kumar R (2019) Ambedkar and Constitution. Delhi: Commonwealth Publishers (P) LTD. Writings and speeches by Dr. B. R. Ambedkar.
  8. Google Scholar

  9. Ingole P (2020) Intersecting Dalit and Cultural studies. CASTE: A Glob J Social Exc 1:91-106.
  10. Indexed at, Google Scholar

  11. Yengde S (2018) Dalit Cinema Journal of South Asian Studies. Routledge Publication.
  12. Google Scholar, Crossref

  13. Yashraj, Tripathi (2020) Dimensions of Narrative through Dress. Contemporary Literary Review India 7.
  14. Indexed at, Google Scholar, Crossref

  15. Haider N (2017) Framing Dalit A study of Satyajit Ray’s Sadgati. Routledge Publication.
  16. Google Scholar, Crossref

  17. Dave R (2021) A Semiotic Analysis of framing in Hindi Films of Satyajit Ray. Narvachana University.
  18. Google Scholar

  19. Rajak S (2020) Problematizing Dalit Chetna: Sadgati as the Battleground of Conflict between the ‘Progressive Casteless Consciousness’ and the Anti-Caste Dalit Consciousness. Rupkatha J Inter Studin Hum 12: 4.
  20. Google Scholar

  21. Sadgati Based on Premchand’s story, Satyajit Ray took a scathing look at the tragic lives of untouchables.
  22. Google Scholar

Copyright © 2023 Global Media Journal, All Rights Reserved