The Nature of Religious Film and Faith and Cultural Conflict in the Film Daya Sagar - Essay Example

Daya Sagar is a film owned by Dayspring Enterprises India. It is produced and directed by Vijaya Chandar, and was shot onsite in India in the 1970s with a cast made entirely of Indian actors and actresses. It tells the biblical story of the life of Christ from his birth through his resurrection, infusing the story with certain native Indian elements such as the use of Indian names and music, but otherwise the story is a mainstream recantation of the story from the Gospel. The New Testament book of Luke serves as the basis for the script. The movie is said to have had a long history of use as a missions tool in India, being used to tell the story of Christ to the Indian population in a presentation that makes them feel that they can own the story, since it presents the religious tale in a way that seems culturally relevant. In this sense, the film has a long history of presentation as a religious film. However, as a strictly academic matter, this raises an important set of questions: 1. What is the nature of religious film and what makes one film religious and another artistic? 2. Where does Daya Sagar fit in this continuum? Does it present itself as religious or merely religion-themed? In this brief essay, these questions will be addressed in turn in order to discuss the Daya Sagar movie within the context of a theoretical framework for religious film. The Nature of Religious Film James Wall (1971), the editor of The Christian Advocate wrote a classic volume of film interpretation that begins with a consideration of censorship of such themes as sexuality in modern cinema and moves toward an aesthetic consideration of the filmmaker’s responsibility when presenting a film as a religious work. In the book, he argues that it is only natural for people oriented toward religion to move beyond a secular concern for assessing film according to religious values to developing standards that can direct the production of film that serves the purposes of religion in a more proactive manner. After all, he writes, concerning Christianity specifically, the need to communicate religious messages is felt as a requirement of the faith by adherents of religion, and film is a particularly good medium to use to communicate with the masses (p. 18). Once we consider the fact that, according to Christian doctrine, “all realms” are to be used for the Glory of God, it is no longer controversial to consider the possibility that film, which is sometimes thought to deal mostly with serious secular topics such as drugs and sex, can be used to represent religion as well. In many ways, in fact, appropriating film as a religious tool is similar to the practice of putting Christian-themed lyrics to popular songs in bygone eras, including some tunes that may have been heard more likely in a saloon rather than a bar. It is using an evocative medium to tell a compelling message, and doing so in a way that appeals to the masses. One of the main reasons that film is useful as a religious tool is that it is a powerful medium for evoking emotions and provoking thought. Johnston (2000) gives a very useful example of such power. He describes a screening that was conducted by a filmmaker who had made film about a fallen Catholic priest who is brought back to his faith through the intervention of a mysterious woman who seems to have miraculous powers. Following the screening, the producers sat and talked with the audience to get their take on what they had just seen. Johnston writes the following: After the screening, the producers tried to elicit from the audience their opinion about technical aspects of the film. Specifically, they wanted to know whether or not the story held up, the characters were compelling, the scenes made sense, and so on. But… “They didn’t get the information they were looking for. Instead they got an hour-long discussion that they had to forcibly stop about God, faith, and miracles.” (p. 21) Johnston goes on to explain this phenomenon by discussing the power that film has to make us “see life” (p. 26), so that an internal conversation goes on within the viewer when he or she is watching a film. This conversation can be used to question values or to set goals that are used to direct one’s life. In other words, film serves as a kind of reality check on our lives, as we use it as a mirror to hold up to our lives and assess where we stand and who we are. This holds at a cultural level as well as at an individual level. Quite apart from the technical aspects of filmography, therefore, movies have a personal and interpersonal role to play in our lives that makes them a particularly ideal place for the exploration of religious themes and influences. Blizek (2010) sums this argument up well, pointing to the differences in perspective from the time that Wall (1971) originally wrote and following a time that such events as that describes by Johnston (2000) took place: Forty years ago people were not sure that movies could make a contribution to our understanding of religion or that religion could make a contribution to our understanding of film. Today there is wide agreement that relationships between religion and film are a fruitful source of academic study. (p.1) So what makes a film religious, rather than merely religion-themed? In other words, does a film have to present an accepted view of religion in order to be called a religious film, or is it merely required to provoke discussion of religion through a presentation of topics that are tangentially related to religion? In order to answer this question, it is useful to consider the case of Martin Scorsese’s film, The Last Temptation of Christ, a film that provoked perhaps more public debate about religion “than any other movie in film history” (Riley, 2003, p. 1) even though it certainly did not follow a traditional or conventional interpretation of religion dictates. In the film, the last few days of Christ are presented in ways that make the story seem, according to many Christians, nothing short of heretical. Themes of sexuality were perhaps the most controversial issues dealt with in the film, which suggested that Christ had an affair with a woman that made him doubt his readiness to submit to his sacrifice. This was considered blasphemy by conservative Christians. However, the film was promoted as a form of secular entertainment. It was based on a work of literary fiction rather than on the religious gospels. But because it was done with a highly-visible and effective director by a major studio, the controversy that surrounded the film centered on whether the film was to be taken as a religious film or not. Some conservative Christian critics rejected it outright, while others argued that by provoking religious conversation the film was religious in nature even if it was not primarily intended to be so. Riley (2003) argued that the film “blurred the lines” between secular film and religious film (p. 4). There are, of course many other such examples made throughout film history. Such classic films as The Greatest Story Ever Told dealt explicitly with religious themes, even if they did so in entertaining ways and occasionally caused controversies of their own through superficial treatments or by cutting corners. Even films such as Spartacus, which dealt with a biblical context but in an entirely fictionalized storyline, had places where it touched religion. However, none of these are what Wall (1971) had in mind when he proposed religious aesthetics and standards for production of religious film. He was looking for specifically religious movies that were intended to present a theme that would inspire people to worship and accept God in their lives, with the film serving as a bridging device that simply presented another way to tap into religious motivation. In other words, religious film for Wall was similar to reading the Bible or listening to hymns. It was a means of worship. Therefore, we have defined two categories of what might be called religious film. As Blizek (2010) argues, “the most prevalent approaches to the study of religion and film are using movies to critique religion and using religion to interpret film” (p. 8). If we take Blizek’s point here regarding using religion to “interpret” film to mean more than merely watching and commenting upon film, but actually producing it for a religious-based purpose, we have a relatively robust measure of the various ways in which film and religion are interrelated. We can view religious film to include everything from secular films that lead to discussions about religion to religious films that can be used to promote the Gospel. Which leads us to our next question and final question: what kind of film is Daya Sagar? Daya Sagar as Religious Film As mentioned above, Daya Sagar is an Indian language film shot entirely with an Indian cast onsite in India that relays an otherwise relatively straightforward account of the life and time of Christ. There are action and battle scenes mixes into the storyline to add to audience appeal, and a script and acting presentation that sometimes leans toward melodrama; however, the scenes that deal with the major events in Christ’s life are presented with an interpretations seems sincerely intended to stay close to the Gospel’s rendering of conservative Christian history. During Christ’s birth, the angel appears to Joseph and tells him to go to Bethlehem with Mary. They are shut out by a number of innkeepers, only to find a barn in which the baby Jesus is born. Three wisemen see the star in the east and follow it to Jesus in order to worship him. King Herod hears of the birth of a new king and sends his soldiers out to kill the firstborn across the land. Jesus, Joseph, and Mary escape Nineveh where he is raised. In addition, the story continues through this vein, complete with a crucifixion scene that last almost a quarter of an hour. There are any number of scenes in Daya Sagar that suggest the film is attempting to present more than a myth, but an actual religious way of viewing the world. In the long crucifixion sequence, Christ is presented as carrying his cross and the punishment he endures registers on the faces of the common people who line the street. This is indicative of the Christian theme that Christ carried the sins of the people on his back and died for their sins. There is a very solemn treatment of the events around his death, and graceful and joyous celebration that follows his resurrection. His rising again is presented with a certain explanation of the religious significance, in order to show that he has conquered death in the way that Christianity professes. The story does not simply suggest he arose and that some magic or misunderstanding occurred around his death. The events surrounding his death and resurrection are presented in a way that seems to promote worship and acceptance of the literal truth of the claims of Christianity. In other words, the film seems, when it is not being merely entertaining, to be concerned with convincing its viewers of the truths of the Christian religion. Except, of course, all of that detail is provided through an Indian interpretation, complete with Indian substitutions for names, and with much of the story presented through popular Indian music styles, and some other nativistic elements mixed in to make the movie more indigenous. Which leads to the question of whether historical accuracy is needed in order to truly present a religious movie. This is not, of course to imply that through the use of Indian language and actors the story falls short. If that were the case, most American movies, and for that matter most movies ever produced bout Christianity, would be false, since Christ did not speak English or French or German (Brent-Plate, 2004). Mel Gibson’s movie The Passion of the Christ makes a purported attempt at historical authenticity, but the controversy surrounding that film and the fact that it was largely privately funded show the exception proving the rule. It is difficult to produce a film that can be considered fully historically accurate regarding religion, partly because religion itself is controversial and sometimes historically opaque. Therefore, in this sense, we may dispose of the question of whether a culturally diverse presentation of the story of Christ can be counted as a religious film that is more than mere commentary on religion but actually aimed at changing lives and promoting worship in the way that Wall (1971) espoused and Blizek (2010) delineated. In fact, we can reasonably ask whether the presentation of Christ’s life in Daya Sagar can be truly effective with an Indian audience if it does not make the story culturally relevant. A religious film that is meant to be more than a conversation starter around religious themes, but is meant to spark religious worship in its viewers must do a few things relatively clearly and well. It must present some aspect of a religious text or tradition in a way that is understandable and relatable. In other words, it must have a connection to the religious tenets and must make that connection clear through its presentation of the story. Further, it must present whatever story it is telling in a way that is compelling for the audience, and in such a way that it moves the audience to some thought or action regarding the religious tenets. Because Daya Sagar presents the life of Christ in a way that closely adheres to major themes in the Gospels and is also consistent with the Indian cinematic presentation of narrative myth generally (Dwyer, 2006, p. 16) – and therefore is more likely to move Indian audiences in a religious way that is related to Christianity rather than the traditional religions of the country – it can be called a religious film that is intended to inspire worship. It is more than mere commentary or history. The fact that it has been used as a source of religious outreach and conversion by Christians in India for several decades further supports this contention. Daya Sagara can be said, therefore, to be a religious film in the strongest sense proposed by Wall (1971), rather than in a more theoretical sense as discussed by Dwyer (2006) and others. In its presentation of religious themes and storylines through a culturally authentic style and venue, Daya Sagar outlines the tenets of the Christian faith and does so in a way that, for an Indian audience has appeal and motivationally suggestiveness. It is not, perhaps the most accomplished artistic film, but it does certainly have a religious intent that seems to override any concerns about artistic integrity in the argument made by Wall (1971). It is not a film being interpreted through a religious lens. It is religion being played out on the large screen. As such, it is an important example of religious film done in a culturally diverse and ecumenical fashion. References Blizek, W. (2009) The Continuum Companion to religion and Film. London: Continuum Brent-Plate, S. (2004) Representing Religion in World Cinema. New York: Palgrave. Dwyer, R. (2006) Filming the Gods: Religion and Indian Cinema. London: Routledge. Johnston, R. (2000) Reel Spirituality: Theology and Film in Dialogue. Grand Rapids: Baker Academic. Riley, R. (2003) Film, Faith and Cultural Conflict: The Case of Martin Scorseses’s Last Temptation. Wesport: Praeger. Wall, J. (1971) Church & Cinema: A Way of Viewing Film. Grand Rapids: William: Eerdmans. Read More