Vaazhai

2024, Tamil, Disney Hotstar, IMDB 8.2/10, Directed by Mari Selvaraj

My article on Mani Selvaraj’s ‘Vaazhai‘, has been published in vol. XXIII July to September 2024 edition of E-Cine India, the E-Journal of the India Chapter of FIPRESCI https://fipresci.org/– Fédération Internationale de la Presse Cinématographique- International Federation of Film Critics

Link to the Jul-Sep 2024 E-journal: https://fipresci-india.org/e-cineindia-july-september-2024/.

Link for my article on Vaazhai: https://fipresci-india.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/10/30.-Critique-Latha-Rajasekar-Vaazhai.pdf

Aided by a brilliant narrative flow, this biopic chapter, based on a tragic event in the director’s adolescent life, emanates the perpetuated pain of his adulthood, that the audience were left to contemplate in his earlier work. The essence of the movie largely remains unadulterated, as the villagers-turned-actors, nourishes the script with their naivety and astonishes with their committed performance.

The director who had delved head-on into daring themes, voicing explicit caste-politics in his previous films, chooses to vent his childhood agony with ‘Vaazhai’, to let the audience know, where his anger stemmed from. The premise is nothing new one may think- a simple livelihood story of a boy in a village of southern Tamilnadu. Surprisingly, everything about ‘Vaazhai’ is new, from the visuals to the cast, from the music to the narrative style.

‘Exploitation of the daily wagers’ being the conflict, the director chooses to let the audience see through the lens of his adolescent eyes, rather than exploring the causes and arriving at a definitive solution. The journey of the humble banana bunches from the soggy farm lands, to our street vendor’s cart, are narrated, staggeringly.

‘Vaazhai’, begins as a travel into the minds of young souls, on the lines of Abbas Kiarostami’s ‘The Experience’ and Majid Majidi’s ‘Children of Heaven’, but later transforms into a non-violent voice of the oppressed, leaving the audience behind, with numerous questions. These were the exact questions that the director wanted us to dwell upon, by knocking our conscience, with every art work of his, starting from ‘Pariyerum Perumal’ to ‘Karnan’ and ‘Maamannan’. The ‘form’ that the director adapts to narrate his perspectives by compiling his childhood memories, attempts to walk the audience beside him, to finally reveal, the toll, ‘exploitation’ has on innocent lives.

From his ‘crush’ on his school teacher Poongodi, to his ‘tiff’ with his buddy Sekar, over movie-based fandom, from the ‘sibling bond’ with his sister Vembu, to his ‘reluctance towards lugging labor’, Mari Selvaraj poeticized, what is, a slice of his life. Director Mari’s representative in the movie, Master Ponvel, plays the character Sivanaindhan, authentically. Portrayal of ‘crush’, especially that of an adolescent boy on his school teacher, is nothing new to Tamil cinema, but is often tricky. Mari’s love for cinema, ‘waters’ his ‘attraction’ towards his teacher, in reciprocation to the ‘kindness’ that she showers on him.

Sivanaindhan couldn’t experience warmth from his poverty-stricken mother, but the caring soul teacher Poongodi, makes him feel welcomed and hence he begins to cling on to her. Played by the gorgeously divine Nikhila Vimal, Poongodi is perhaps a savior in Sivanaindhan’s eyes, raising above the crush status, to a person who would save him against all odds. The handkerchief of the teacher is a ‘treasure’ to the child and the sequence where his sister helps him wash the kerchief for his safe keeping, compels the audience to endorse the child’s emotions.

The boy is drawn to the teacher, for the ‘happy state’ that she is in. One is left to infer that the child longs his sister and mom to be in a near similar state too, when he returned home, from school. Instead, ‘lugging banana bunches’, an intensive labor for a child his age, is what is thrown at him, to repay the family’s debt. Mari’s elaborate sequences to establish the naivety of Sivanaindhan’s crush is a beautiful ‘set up’ that gets ‘paid off’ doubly in the end.

Sivanaindhan’s combinations with his friend Sekar, are sheer rib ticklers, and the one where Sekar is caught for lying about his thorn pricked foot, to escape lugging over the weekend, leaves you laugh, not without a cautioning pain within. The morality of the film’s crux and the awareness around it, reaches a wider audience, through these commercially viable comic reliefs, which is a clear success to the creator’s intention.

Kani, a socialist who demands, wage hike for lugging and his romance angle with Sivanaindhan’s sister Vembu, are alluring sub plots. Played by Kalaiyarasan, and Divya Duraisamy, the couple nail their respective roles, through subtle expressions and brief eye contacts. ‘Marudhani (henna leaves) messenger’, Sivanaindhan, after delivering the leaves to Kani from his sister Vembu as a gesture of love, expresses his liking for Kani to her. Sivanaindhan asking his sister to marry Kani, is Mari registering, the boy’s insecurity and his yearning for a ‘better tomorrow’.

Only when frames ‘tell’ the tale and ‘guide’ the audience’s eyes, shot compositions become meaningful. Mari threads his frames to express the mind space of his characters in all his work, more effectively so in Vaazhai, as the director is left to explore his adolescent self, along with his pain, his hunger, his agony and his happiness. His ‘native-self’ gushes his writing in an uninterrupted flow, but gives adequate time for the viewers to engage in Sivanaindhan’s traits, his morals, emotions and actions.

Mari Selvaraj’s disclaimer announces that the movie, is a perspective born out of his clouded childhood memories. Vaazhai, is him reiterating to the viewers, on what he thought as a child, that might have led the tragic incident. He slowly builds his screenplay, towards a riveting climax.

I vividly remember the question my dear friend asked me after seeing Mari’s debut film, ‘Pariyerum Perumal’. We both were left speechless to have witnessed a daring work of the director, in bringing out the pain of the oppressed, after a long hiatus of such works, in the Tamil industry. Viewers related to the pain in the narration and concurred with the climax that ended on a positive note – If not a ‘debate’ at the least, a ‘dialogue’, has begun between the extremes. In addition to the moral dilemma the movie left us with, my friend asked me the question that her uncle had asked her – ‘The movie is a great work of art, but would you accept a lower caste boy, into your family as your son-in-law?’ I was baffled as I myself was contemplating such dilemmas within. I may not be a fanatic, but I still would definitely need a lot of persuasion and the right mettle to face the relatives. My educated daughter with worldly exposure, overtly expresses her likes and dislikes to me. But I may not be able to mimic her, while handling my parents, for the equation with them is not the same as mine with her. My answer to my friend was – ‘We are bound to ‘change’, if we were to find ourselves in a similar situation’.

Just like all works of Mari, ‘Vaazhai’ too made a few people, question his intentions. A doctor friend of mine claimed, children giving a hand to parents in helping them with their burden needn’t be labeled as ‘labor or exploitation’. He also argued that, sharing parent’s burden will only make the children aware of the parent’s toiling life, so they will grow up to become responsible adults. He went on to add that, many of his friends who have reared cattle, irrigated crops, assisted their parents weave, during their weekend holidays, have shaped into becoming better individuals.

To me, Mari’s ‘Vaazhai’ spoke in a completely different tone altogether. To begin with, Sivanaindhan’s life was not a happy nostalgia of Mari’s. Most of us would agree that the basic human needs in a child’s life are- safety, food and shelter. Sivanaindhan seemingly has a shelter over his head, food on his plate and safety of his mom. But the director urges us to ‘infer’ the psychological insecurities of the child.

The boy is seen sleeping under the steel cot and it was a connotation of ‘insecurity’, for me. Again, his constant bed-wetting implied an emotional stress in the boy’s mind. The anxious child, retaliates lugging and his mom and sister are left to coax him. Sivanaindhan is seen expressing his feelings to his sister, on more than one instance. He ‘chooses’ to participate in a weekend dance practice at school with his favorite teacher, over the strenuous banana bunch lugging. His sister respects his ‘freedom of choice’, the very same she had been denied in the name of ‘conditioning’. She lets him jump off the lorry and it turns out that she had let him ‘live’ both literally and figuratively. Little did she know that a few in the lorry including her, were ill-fated as the climax twists the tale.

UNICEF India, says an ideal childhood in India, is one where children are: Well-nourished, physically healthy, mentally alert, emotionally sound, socially competent, and ready to learn. The ever ready-to-learn child Sivanaindhan – ‘demands’ nourishment in the plain carbohydrate he hogs, ‘demands’ health in the neck sprain caused by lugging, ‘demands’ the right to choose to do what intrigues him. He is seen to stabilize his state of mind by clinging on to the teacher and ends up socially competent, by inferring the injustice, the meager ‘one-rupee hike’ had caused.  What should rightfully be his, as a child, Sivanaindhan had to demand it all from his ignorant parents, and eventually transform into ‘Mari Selvaraj’.

Going back to my doctor friend’s perspective, I told myself, assisting parents in lessening their burden, is not the same as lugging in ‘someone else’s farm’. The favor of running errands for parents, is nothing close to a child helping parent clear the family’s debts. It to me has the stench of ‘slavery’ all over it. Sivaniandhan is not complaining to rear his cow but he is ‘made to do it’ because he wanted to escape lugging. It’s just that the child demands ‘autonomy’ of doing what pleases him.

How can anyone brand a child fussy, the one who roots to break his ‘shackles free’. When the doctor friend claims many of his friends from similar background as that of Sivanaindhan’s, have struggled their way to become eminent, the discreet egoist within, coaxed, saying Mari Selvaraj had managed to become the voice of the oppressed, through his chosen medium of movies.

Depiction of ‘Hunger’ is a painful watch and when it is a child who is hungry, it leaves the on-looker’s heart wrenched. It is a daring script by the director on trying to demystify the plight of his down trodden ignorant parent(s), who were left with no choice other than coercing their children to work with them. There are scripts that leave you applauding for braving a solution, there are screenplays that leave you empathizing the distressed and there are directors who narrate ‘life’ like ‘Vaazhai’, that leaves one numb, helpless and bewildered, for bringing to light such untold facets of oppression.