Land of Lime

Madhumalati has three suitors, and she likes them all. The nature of her feelings towards each of them isn’t clear to her but she has to choose one of them before she turns sixteen; otherwise, according to her astrological charts, she would die. Remember this is a pre-modern story and don’t shake your head in surprise and say: no sixteen year old ought to be making that decision. Let us simply assume that in times past, before we became modern, folks were wiser and more mature at an earlier age. Madhumalati’s dilemma is real and speaks to our own times and dilemmas in interesting ways.

Madhumalati is an atypical Dr. Rajkumar film. He is simply one of the suitors and isn’t the bearer of moral dilemma. Nor does he offer the solution to Madhumalati’s dilemma. Rather, he is one of the agents responsbile for her moral confusion. In fact, the movie too isn’t particularly good or enjoyable. The story line is thin and stretched out. Dialogues are trite and there are very few memorable lines. Songs too don’t linger in our mind, long after the viewing of the film. The story itself is taken from the well known Betala Paccisi series of stories in which king Vikramaditya of Ujjayini solves questions posed by the ghost. But the king isn’t part of the framing of the film itself and merely comes at the end, to resolve Madhumalati’s dilemma.

The film opens with the birth of Madhumalati, who is the daughter of a merchant called Keshavachandra Gupta of Ujjayini. A Sorcerer predicts that she will live for only sixteen years; however, if she is married before she turns sixteen then, she will escape from her destined death. It is not easy to find her a groom though, since he should be proficient in astrology, Atharvaveda and sorcery and finally, marital arts.
In the meanwhile, the Sorcerer needs sixteen 16-year old young virgins to complete his tribhuvana vashikarana sacrifice, which would enable him to hypnotize and control all beings. He already has fifteen and then having identified Madhumalati, that flawless beauty who is perfect for his sacrifice, he sends his disciple to kidnap her, when she is about to turn sixteen. Our three young heroes - Madhusudana Sharma, the astrologer, Trivikrama Sena, the warrior and Vamanadatta, an expert in magic and sorcery - rescue her on three different occasions, fall in love with her and plan to seek her hand in marriage. Since they still hadn’t completed their education, they continue their journey, study with the same teacher and become very good friends. Yet they do not know their lives are intertwined through their love towards Madhumalati.

Then having failed in his quest to obtain her, the Sorcerer arrives at Keshavchandra’s house, with a plan to trick her parents and take her away. The three suitors too arrive at the same time, are surprised to find each other seeking Madhumalati’s hand; they are prepared to sacrifice their lives but not their love for Madhumalati. When Madhumalati in unable to choose, they compete for love but then all three successfully pass the test, leading to an impasse.

A confused and uncertain Madhumalati seeks advice from the Sorcerer ironically, who tricks her and takes her away to his cave, after hypnotizing her. Now, all three suitors had to work together, use all their skills of sorcery, marital arts and astrology to rescure her and bring her back to her parents home. Whose contribution was critical and who deserves her? She, however, couldn’t decide even now since all three of them contributed to her rescue and couldn’t have accomplished it alone. Before she could choose, she is bit by the snake that the Sorcerer had sent to kill Vamanadatta.

Would it surprise us now if all three suitors fight over the right to cremate her? When her parents refuse to entertain any such request, Vamanadatta magically takes the body away and cremates her. Trivikrama keeps her ashes, whereas Madhusudhana wanders all over the world, seeking the knowledge of Sanjivini mantra, which will bring her back to life. Now when is brought back to life, here is the final question: who should she marry and what should be the criteria for making that decision? If Madhusudana learnt sanjivini to bring her back to life, Trivikrama had preserved her ashes, which was only possible since Vamana had stolen her body and cremated her.

While all the courtiers fail to offer an acceptable solution, Vikramaditya, the Indian Solomon, offers his judgment. She does indeed love all three of them, since they are related for many lives but the nature of her love (which isn’t evident to her too) and her relationship to these three men clearly manifests itself in the role they played in her life so far. Vamana having performed her cremation, has shown he is her son, whereas Madhusudana being responsible for her rebirth, is her father; Trivikrama, on the other hand, had been her husband in past lives and hence he kept her ashes. So he should marry her.

I realize it is hard to ignore the (ontological) roots and the framing ideas of this story in the Karma theory, but what made me sit up and think is simply Madhumalati’s moral dilemma. While the story and the film are somewhat absurd, Madhumalati’s confusion at having to choose from among three suitors is something that we could relate to. Who do we like and why? What ought to determine our conduct and duty? Yet, when we don’t have access to Vikramaditya’s wisdom and judgment, whagt do we rely on? Modernity offers us the freedom to choose selves and make life style choices, without necessarily providing the moral anchors outside of ourselves and our bodies, some prior truths, some ontological certainties, whether we believe in them or not. What are the apriori values that constitute and/or determine the basis of our conduct?

These are the questions that linger in our minds, long after we watch this uninteresting and forgetful film.

Postscript: At the core of such moral dilemmas are our desires and sometimes, conflicting need to act responsbily and ethically. Speaking of desire, I read Mohan Rakesh’s classic play Ashadh ka ek din (One day in Ashadha) yesterday. The play is on Kalidasa, his muse, Mallika, and unrealized possibilities. Invited by the king of Ujjayini to be his court poet, Kalidasa leaves his village and Mallika behind, somewhat reluctantly. He knew of the seductions of power and recognition but he also sought them actively. But his creative spirit remains tied to the village, and Mallika, for (and to) whom he continued to write all his works. One day he finally returns, seeking to make a new beginning but Mallika is married and has a young daughter. She waited for him a long time, even had merchants bring his kavyas and read them all. But it is too late. Kalidasa says:

I said that i wanted to make a new beginning. Possibly it was the struggle between desire and time. I see that time is more powerful because …. Because it doesn’t wait.

In my mind, both these stories spoke to each other and the link wasn’t merely the city of Ujjayini or king Vikramaditya, in whose court Kalidasa served. Mohan Rakesh’s play is profoundly modern, especially in its conception of the characters of Mallika and Kalidasa. And thus very different from the spirit and world view of Madhumalati. More on these difference, sometime soon.

Cast of Madhumalati: Rajkumar, Udaykumar, Arunkumar, Bharati, Ashwath, M P Shankar.
Dialogue: Sitaramashastri
Background Singing: S Janaki, P B Srinivas,
Music: G K Venkatesh
Script and Direction: S K A Chari.