The novelist was Sarat Chandra Chattopadhyay – one of the literary legends from Bengal. He turned to Rabindranath Tagore for support against the ban. Tagore had a different take on the protest.
Because of the ideas it contained, a hundred years ago the British banned a book. Cut to 2026, West Bengal has just seen a major political change. And in the first Durga Puja since that change, Bengal’s renowned director Srijit Mukherji brings back to the screen the Sarat Chandra-Tagore dispute in his film ‘Emperor Vs Sarat Chandra’ set to release on October 15.
Even today, that exchange remains an important part of Bengal’s literary and intellectual history. Srijit made an important argument when asked why he thought that Sarat Chandra-Tagore face-off is relevant today and if the discourse reflects the dilemma faced by artists today in the Bengali film industry, which has often been closely associated with the political power in the state. Bengal has a long tradition of intellectual disagreement spilling beyond literature into politics and public life. Mukherji now takes on a new challenge of examining dissent and dilemma through the lens of Tagore and Chattopadhyay and asking whether an artist should simply let the work speak to power or challenge power when it strikes back. In undivided Bengal, disagreements among great intellectuals were not unusual. There were cerebral differences, exchanges of letters and notes and sharp disagreements of opinion. A similar intellectual disagreement emerged between Tagore and Chattopadhyay during the British period, at a time when the colonial state was interfering with and placing severe restrictions on artistic and intellectual freedom. The film draws on Pather Dabi, its banning by the British government, Sarat Chandra’s resistance to that decision and, importantly, the correspondence between Sarat Chandra and Rabindranath Tagore. Before we delve deeper into the disagreement between the legends, it begs the question why the director felt so deeply about the issue to turn it into a film, especially during Durga Puja? A period when Bengalis are indulgent and commerce thrives in the city. Is there a feeling of disappointment when support does not come from expected quarters? You might want to seek help from people who you would expect to rally around you if any injustice is done against you. That support doesn’t always come. When Pather Dabi appeared, the British colonial administration reacted strongly. This is where the personal and social backgrounds of Rabindranath Tagore and Sarat Chandra become important. Rabindranath belonged to the Tagore family of Jorasanko, one of the most prominent families of Bengal. Sarat Chandra, by contrast, was much closer to the ordinary Bengali household and to people living outside the privileged social establishment. His own life was far more unsettled. He lived in the Howrah region, travelled to Burma and experienced a wandering existence. He wrote to Rabindranath Tagore and sought his support. His request was essentially this: if the British government had prohibited the novel, could Rabindranath intervene and ask the authorities to withdraw the ban? Sarat Chandra’s reasoning was straightforward. If ordinary people were prevented from reading the novel, then what was the point of writing it? Rabindranath, however, took a different position. His response was, in essence, that if Sarat Chandra had used his pen to challenge and condemn British rule, then he also had to accept the consequences of doing so. To attack the colonial government through literature and then ask that same government to show leniency appeared, from Tagore’s perspective, contradictory. A century later, Sarat Chandra still has his readers. What he did not receive in quite the same way was the kind of public afterlife associated with Tagore – the travelling name, the institutional presence and the continuous public debate surrounding his work. His characters, his depiction of ordinary Bengali life and his ability to portray social injustice made him one of Bengal’s most widely read writers. But Pather Dabi reveals another side of him – a writer confronting colonial power directly and using fiction to engage with revolution, nationalism and resistance. (Shreya Sinha is Deputy Editor, NDTV. Jayanta Ghosal is Consulting Editor, NDTV) Disclaimer: These are the personal opinions of the author
Because pather Dabi is completing 100 years and is still remembered not simply as a literary work but as a political and historical document of its time, the controversy has acquired fresh relevance this year. That difference in background is important because, when the British government banned Pather Dabi, Sarat Chandra did not simply accept the decision. Because he had protested, sarat Chandra should not expect the colonial authorities to withdraw the punishment simply. A Puja-season film about a banned book therefore brings that old disagreement back into public conversation. Because sarat Chandra is often remembered primarily through his social fiction, that is important.
Their disagreement centred on Sarat Chandra’s novel, Pather Dabi, published in 1926. Speaking to NDTV, Mukherji said his range of work, after having 12 Puja releases, has been versatile, and that he believes any good film works in the Puja and it does not necessarily have to be commercial and massy. A still from the film Photo Credit: youtube.com/@NandyMovies He said, “I think the topicality of Emperor versus Sarat Chandra, apart from the hundred-year celebration of Pather Dabi and 150-year celebration of Sarat Chandra, is also about today’s day and age where you might want collaborators from your own community. On 4 January 1927, the British government proscribed the book on the grounds that it contained material intended to bring the government into contempt and excite disaffection towards British rule. The ban remained in force for years and was finally lifted in 1939, a year after Sarat Chandra’s death.
Srijit Mukherji has now turned that history into the basis of his film “Emperor vs Sarat Chandra”. He in fact said that he has faith in the Bengali audience to watch a movie that is well made.
Mukherji’s sharp political commentary reflects in the two Sabyasachis he put on screen in the same year While the original discourse stands out and is relevant even today. But Sarat Chandra was deeply hurt by this response. Sarat Chandra drafted a reply to Tagore but ultimately did not send it. In that draft, he made it clear that he accepted Tagore’s right to hold his own opinion but objected to what he believed was an implication that he was protesting merely to protect himself. He fails to understand the new world, but refuses to give in. In the end, a twist. Sabyasachi once again faces the barrel of a gun but does not die. Is it the principles that don’t die in him or is it Sabyasachi’s blind faith that prevents him from seeing the real world? But in ‘Emperor vs Sarat Chandra’, Sabyasachi Mallik does not sit back and wait for a change. He is an extraordinary and almost larger-than-life revolutionary character. He can adopt different disguises and identities and possesses an extraordinary ability to move through different social worlds while remaining beyond the reach of the British authorities. He is committed to fighting British rule and is prepared to continue that struggle to the last drop of his blood. The character of Sabyasachi became one of the most memorable elements of the novel. This is precisely the historical and intellectual world that Srijit Mukherji is now bringing to the screen. Mallik forces power to respond While Sen waits and resists. Which Sabyasachi is closer to the Bengali political temperament? In Sabyasachi Sen, faith outlives power. This faith is there in the mind of Bengalis but at an extreme pressure point, where it continuously encounters blows from the power, turns into the other Sabyasachi Mallik.
Tagore’s letter therefore emphasised dignity, responsibility and the willingness of a writer to accept the consequences of his own act of dissent. Winkle Twinkle, a cinematic adaptation of Bratya Basu’s acclaimed play by the same name, shows Sabyasachi Sen, essayed effortlessly by Ritwick Chakraborty, as a communist who sleeps through 26 years of political and social change and wakes up to a different world.
Responding to that question, Mukherji said, “I think both Sabyasachi’s are a part of the Bengali psyche. Highlighting a line from a song from Winkle Twinkle, he said, “In fact there’s a song in Winkle Twinkle which has a line: ‘Slogan palte hoye jaye fishfash, fishfash tao palte jete pare, hotat karo prachondo chitkare (A slogan can turn into a whisper; even a whisper can change – suddenly, into someone’s tremendous scream)’, so the tremendous scream is Sabyasachi Mallik and the slogan which sometimes becomes whispers over years of inactivity is Sabyasachi Sen.
