BOOK EXCERPT

‘Mother India’ at the Oscars: ‘The audience laughed with the characters and cried with them’

Mehboob Khan’s celebrated epic was the first Indian film to be nominated in the Best Foreign Language Film category in 1958.

For Mehboob the crowing moments of glory followed one after another in quick succession. Following the sweeping victory of Mother India at the “Flimfare” awards, Mehboob received the finest news he had ever received in his entire life – his film “Mother India” had been nominated as the Indian entry in the Best Foreign Language Film category at the Academy Awards in Hollywood. It was the first ever Indian film to have received this signal honour.

His pulses pounding with the taste of impending glory Mehboob knew that the time had come for his third visit to Hollywood. This time he would attend the Academy Awards ceremony in person – because this time he and wife Sardar Akhtar were invited as guests of the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences in Los Angeles.

During my tenure at “Filmfare” we had an excellent Hollywood correspondent, Sylvia Norris. And well in advance of Mr and Mrs Mehboob’s departure for Hollywood we had briefed her to personally look after them well, to fix up whatever appointments Mehboob wanted with the people he needed to meet in Hollywood, and to file a detailed report on it all.

Here’s what Sylvia Norris wrote (“Filmfare:” June 6, 1958): The day Mehboob Khan met Cecil B. DeMille in Hollywood, he was referred to as ‘The DeMille of India’. This is a title he richly deserves, not only for his latest spectacle, Mother India, but for the thirty years of devotion he has given the Indian film industry.

“When the producer and director, Mehboob Khan and his wife arrived in Hollywood as guest of the academy of Motion Picture Arts and sciences, they caused quite a sensation. They were the centre of attraction at every press conference and party they attended people kept asking if Mrs Khan was the star of Mother India.”

“Later, I learned that she had indeed starred in the original version in 1993, an ambitious young man had produced and directed Woman, as it was then titled, starring Sardar Akhtar. A short time later he married the lovely girl.

“And what did Mr Mehboob think of Hollywood?

“A very delightful, interesting city. I was here a few years ago when my picture Aan was screened. It has changed quite a lot. It seems much bigger than it was before – it spreads out for so many miles. In New York the city grows upwards, here…” he spread his hands. “It is like so many towns joined together.”

“What did he think of the studios in Hollywood? Mehboob has pursed his lips slightly. “Picture studios – They are the same everywhere. Of course the studios are much larger here than they are in India. The stages are bigger. The sets more elaborate. Sometimes, more time and money is spent on a sequence that may be on the screen for no more than a few minutes…” and then he had smiled.” But who am I to talk of the Hollywood studios?”

“In speaking of the main differences as he saw it between Hollywood and India. Mehboob had said that in Hollywood it was like a machine – it was very business-like, whereas in India it was more of a family affair and a producer would have great personal interest in the welfare of the people working for him.

“I believe I found a good example of this while going through the illustrated brochure on Mother India which the academy gave me, when Mehboob’s picture was nominated.

“One whole page is given over “In Gratitude to Friends.” There are also pictures of them and Mehboob says: “When a producer requires 300 bullock-carts, 2000 farmers, scores of horse, tractors and ploughs and 500 acres of paddy fields to be flooded – not to mention the sympathy and active support of scores of villages – to produce a spectacular picture like Mother India, money becomes a helpless instrument of negotiation.”

“This is the difference.

“In Hollywood, a producer’s main consideration is to have the money or find a group of persons or a bank to finance him. Then he will go out and buy what he needs in the way of equipment, rent the land and hire the people.

“Further, says Mehboob: “Money cannot buy these things in India .But the love and sentiment of our beloved peasants can place all this and more at the disposal of the producer.”

“The two private screenings of Mother India were well-attended. General reaction to the film was that the music, the story and the photography were of top quality, and the acting and directing superb – especially that of Nargis, and of Master Sajid who played as a young boy.

“I noticed that the audience laughed with him and, at times, cried with him. The boy is remarkable. He has star quality.

“And,” Mehboob told me, “he was only four year old when we made the picture.”

“Fortunately, I was able to view Mother India in the long version. “I wanted to show my cut version,” said Mehboob, “It runs just under two hours – but Technicolor had the print and told me they could not have it ready in time for the Oscar voting.

“He is modest. Mother India is too great a picture to cut down to half its original playing time.

“Mehboob Khan’s modesty was evident in many ways. For instance, he did not notify anyone in Hollywood of his arrival. The Academy was still sending cables to India, asking when he was expected, when he was safely ensconced in the Beverly Hills Hotel and looking around quietly at everything.

“However, when asked, he was quite willing to return to the airport – a round trip of about twenty-five miles – for his official arrival, after he had already spent a whole week there!”

Mother India did not win the Academy Award that year. It lost by a single vote at the third poll. The Best Foreign Film Award went to the Italian Producer Dino de Laurentiis’ Nights of Cabiria.

It was a severe blow but Mehboob put a smile on it and laughed it off. What he did win however was a marked respect as a great film showman from India. And above all, when his guru Cecil B. DeMille saw the film he was all praise for Mehboob yet again and confessed to having come to know the real India better after seeing the film.

Excerpted with permission from Mehboob...India’s DeMille by Bunny Reuben, HarperCollins India.

We welcome your comments at letters@scroll.in.
Sponsored Content  BY 

As India turns 70, London School of Economics asks some provocative questions

Is India ready to become a global superpower?

Meaningful changes have always been driven by the right, but inconvenient questions. As India completes 70 years of its sovereign journey, we could do two things – celebrate, pay our token tributes and move on, or take the time to reflect and assess if our course needs correction. The ‘India @ 70: LSE India Summit’, the annual flagship summit of the LSE (London School of Economics) South Asia Centre, is posing some fundamental but complex questions that define our future direction as a nation. Through an honest debate – built on new research, applied knowledge and ground realities – with an eclectic mix of thought leaders and industry stalwarts, this summit hopes to create a thought-provoking discourse.

From how relevant (or irrelevant) is our constitutional framework, to how we can beat the global one-upmanship games, from how sincere are business houses in their social responsibility endeavours to why water is so crucial to our very existence as a strong nation, these are some crucial questions that the event will throw up and face head-on, even as it commemorates the 70th anniversary of India’s independence.

Is it time to re-look at constitution and citizenship in India?

The Constitution of India is fundamental to the country’s identity as a democratic power. But notwithstanding its historical authority, is it perhaps time to examine its relevance? The Constitution was drafted at a time when independent India was still a young entity. So granting overwhelming powers to the government may have helped during the early years. But in the current times, they may prove to be more discriminatory than egalitarian. Our constitution borrowed laws from other countries and continues to retain them, while the origin countries have updated them since then. So, do we need a complete overhaul of the constitution? An expert panel led by Dr Mukulika Banerjee of LSE, including political and economic commentator S Gurumurthy, Madhav Khosla of Columbia University, Niraja Gopal Jayal of JNU, Chintan Chandrachud the author of the book Balanced Constitutionalism and sociologist, legal researcher and Director of Council for Social Development Kalpana Kannabiran will seek answers to this.

Is CSR simply forced philanthropy?

While India pioneered the mandatory minimum CSR spend, has it succeeded in driving impact? Corporate social responsibility has many dynamics at play. Are CSR initiatives mere tokenism for compliance? Despite government guidelines and directives, are CSR activities well-thought out initiatives, which are monitored and measured for impact? The CSR stipulations have also spawned the proliferation of ambiguous NGOs. The session, ‘Does forced philanthropy work – CSR in India?” will raise these questions of intent, ethics and integrity. It will be moderated by Professor Harry Barkema and have industry veterans such as Mukund Rajan (Chairman, Tata Council for Community Initiatives), Onkar S Kanwar (Chairman and CEO, Apollo Tyres), Anu Aga (former Chairman, Thermax) and Rahul Bajaj (Chairman, Bajaj Group) on the panel.

Can India punch above its weight to be considered on par with other super-powers?

At 70, can India mobilize its strengths and galvanize into the role of a serious power player on the global stage? The question is related to the whole new perception of India as a dominant power in South Asia rather than as a Third World country, enabled by our foreign policies, defense strategies and a buoyant economy. The country’s status abroad is key in its emergence as a heavyweight but the foreign service officers’ cadre no longer draws top talent. Is India equipped right for its aspirations? The ‘India Abroad: From Third World to Regional Power’ panel will explore India’s foreign policy with Ashley Tellis, Meera Shankar (Former Foreign Secretary), Kanwal Sibal (Former Foreign Secretary), Jayant Prasad and Rakesh Sood.

Are we under-estimating how critical water is in India’s race ahead?

At no other time has water as a natural resource assumed such a big significance. Studies estimate that by 2025 the country will become ‘water–stressed’. While water has been the bone of contention between states and controlling access to water, a source for political power, has water security received the due attention in economic policies and development plans? Relevant to the central issue of water security is also the issue of ‘virtual water’. Virtual water corresponds to the water content (used) in goods and services, bulk of which is in food grains. Through food grain exports, India is a large virtual net exporter of water. In 2014-15, just through export of rice, India exported 10 trillion litres of virtual water. With India’s water security looking grim, are we making the right economic choices? Acclaimed author and academic from the Institute of Economic Growth, Delhi, Amita Bavisar will moderate the session ‘Does India need virtual water?’

Delve into this rich confluence of ideas and more at the ‘India @ 70: LSE India Summit’, presented by Apollo Tyres in association with the British Council and organized by Teamworks Arts during March 29-31, 2017 at the India Habitat Centre, New Delhi. To catch ‘India @ 70’ live online, register here.

At the venue, you could also visit the Partition Museum. Dedicated to the memory of one of the most conflict-ridden chapters in our country’s history, the museum will exhibit a unique archive of rare photographs, letters, press reports and audio recordings from The Partition Museum, Amritsar.

This article was produced by the Scroll marketing team on behalf of Teamwork Arts and not by the Scroll editorial team.