An old Malayalam movie and some ruminations on relationships

I happened to watch the Malayalam movie ‘Dasaratham (ദശരഥം)’ today (23rd Sept 2018), 29 years after its release. I was three decades late watching such an outstanding movie, but I am happy that I finally got to know about it and watched it. A short google search revealed that the movie was indeed much critically acclaimed and did well in the box-office at the time of its release and continues to be appreciated by serious Malayalam movie buffs who do not restrict themselves to only new releases. While most people appreciated the superlative performance of Mohanlal and the central theme of the movie (surrogacy) as much ahead of time, I was awestruck by the characterisation of the central character — Rajiv Menon—played by Mohanlal.

Rajiv Menon seems to be unable to appreciate the nature and depth of ‘relationships’ as he himself states explicitly in one of the scenes. I must say that the scriptwriter (Lohithadas) indeed did a fantastic job in convincingly portraying Rajiv Menon as someone who can’t understand and engage in meaningful relationships. There are multiple instances which brings out this awkward trait of Rajiv.

It starts with him calling his friend Scariah’s wife by her first name (Mariyamma) and the traditional rural Malayali lady played by none other than KPAC Lalitha (another superlative performance from her) promptly admonishes him, saying “Being affluent do not mean you will call elder ladies by name, you should call me Chechi”. Then comes the instance where Rajiv Menon naively asks Scariah to ‘give’ one of his sons to him, so that he can have a foster son. The response of Scariah is a bit melodramatic, but he, obviously, refuses. Later, when Chandradas — husband of Annie, the woman who agrees to be the surrogate mother, in order to raise money for Chandradas’s Kidney transplantation — comes to meet the now pregnant Annie after recuperating from his operation, Rajiv tries to stop him from meeting Annie. But the instant Annie sees Chandradas from a distance, she sprints to him and holds him in a tight hug, while a bewildered Rajiv looks on and tries in vain to stop her. This time, the first instance in the movie, Rajiv realises his folly and promptly apologises. There are multiple instances where it is made evident that Rajiv had absolutely no concern for Annie — the surrogate mother — beyond the concern that he should get a healthy baby borne by her. He prevents her from staying back with Chandradas after the operation and takes her away for providing a ‘healthy’ atmosphere for the pregnant lady to ensure good health of the baby growing in her womb. When Annie is in labour and her obstetrician is considering Caesarean section over normal delivery, Rajiv promptly — and insensitively — tells Chandradas and his mother that it is better that caesarean section is done (Vs normal delivery) because the baby will be ‘safe’ that way (though the operation will inconvenience Annie). Soon afterwards, when the baby is born and is handed over to Rajiv, he declares to Chandradas and his mother that he is so happy that they can demand anything from him and he shall satisfy their demand. He was obviously expecting that they will demand more money, but to his utter surprise Chadradas’s mother just asks him permission to kiss the child. She goes ahead to kiss the baby in his hands, while Rajiv is all perplexed at the apparently trivial demand she made. Later, when Annie goes away with the baby, all the care Rajiv showed towards her till then turns into utter rage and he is a transformed man in words and manners, using uncivilised language at her, calling her a ‘cheat’ and even attempting assault. The movie ends with Rajiv Menon returning the baby to Annie after Chandradas persuades her to hand over the baby to Rajiv. Chandradas asks Annie to choose between himself, her husband, and her baby (fathered by Rajiv Menon by artificial insemination), leaving Annie is mortal dilemma. Demonstrating that Rajiv had indeed started understanding relationships, or at least had started acknowledging that there are indeed relationships that exist beyond the realm of ‘transactional relationships’ he had experienced till then in his own life, he hands over the baby to Annie and asks Chandradas not to force Annie to make a choice, because he was afraid that Chandradas may be the loser and he do not want that to happen. Further, reinforcing the impression that he had indeed understood the undefinable bond between a mother and the child she gives birth and nurses to life, he asks Maggie (Sukumari), in an emotionally charged final scene whether all mothers are like Annie and whether Maggie will be able to give him a mother’s love.

The movie revolves around the issue of ‘relationships’ and that is what got me interested. I have always wondered about the meaning and nature of ‘love’ as professed by everyone and ubiquitously described in popular culture, fiction and movies. I have asked myself, for decades now, the question ‘What is love?’, or rather what is ‘True’ love? How do you identify whether you love someone or not? How do you identify whether someone really loves you or not? And why do people love someone they ‘love’? When someone says he/she is loving someone, is it really ‘true’ love? In fact, is there some thing called ‘true’ love in reality or are we all calling our transactional relationships ‘love’ out of habit? Is it not true that often ‘love’ is used to describe a relationship where the individuals are depended on the other for survival? Or when one of them is dependent on the other this dependent nature of relationship is masked by the euphemism of ‘love’? Is it not true that a man/woman may be dependent financially on his/her spouse and have no way other than to ‘love’ his/her spouse for a financially secure and socially dignified life? Are not children dependent on their parents for their well being and education and it is ‘better’ that they ‘love’ their parents than be indifferent or antagonistic? Are not parents expecting their children they ‘love’ to take care of them when they are old? When almost every single relationship we engage in, even within the family, are linked with motives which may be covert and even distant, can we call such relationships ‘true love’? Is it really possible to love someone without absolutely no ‘material’ reason why you have an attachment with that person and expect nothing in return, not even love? If you are expecting ‘love’ in return, can one deny that he/she is not expecting ‘care’ from that person as well? Don’t loving and caring go together? Is it possible to love and not care? If you expect to be cared, is the love ‘true’ love, because you are expecting something in return?

I have found these questions extremely complex and I am afraid I do not have clear answers. I have often tried telling myself that love is ‘selfless’ and is inherently ‘sacrificial’ in nature. This means that if I have ‘selfless’ thoughts and behaviour towards a person, where I am willing to make personal sacrifices for the happiness and wellbeing of that person, without expecting anything more than happiness of that person, it means that I ‘Love’ that person. Similarly, if I find a person who displays selfless behaviour in his relationship and transaction with me and is seen making sacrifices — need not necessarily be in monetary terms, but can be in numerous other forms as well and even may be trivial in nature — without expecting anything in return, I can assure myself that I have identified someone who ‘loves’ me.

And by this definition of love, Rajiv Menon, the central character of Dasaratham was a transformed man by the end of the movie. From a person who could not understand or engage in loving and meaningful relationships, he gives away his baby to Annie, the biological mother, who finds it difficult to abandon the child. Only someone who is capable of understanding love and knows what it means to be in love and being loved, will be able to do that.

I am glad that I watched the movie! It was time well spent.