Decoding Article 15 with screenwriter Gaurav Solanki

Among the usual calls and messages of congratulations for his first job, Article 15, it is the satisfaction of finally finding the sense of his anger that dominates the writer Gaurav Solanki. "I did not want to express my anger on Facebook or Twitter." He waited nearly eight years for this to happen.

In an interview with indianexpress.com, Gaurav embarks on the article 15 journey, which he co-wrote with director Anubhav Sinha, the scenes he wanted were shot differently and what he wants the high caste to learn from the film

Here are excerpts from the conversation:

Q. When did the article 15 trip begin?

Indirectly, it started when I was growing up. I remember incidents in my ancestral village in the western west. I think I was 11 or 12 years old when I saw my close slapping a dalit worker. It was odd that two men in their forties had insulted someone and that worker was apologizing to them. This moment stayed with me.

Later, I read in the newspaper an incident in Gohana (Haryana) where two or three Dalits were beaten to death by a mob, in the name of the cow's vigilantism. The crimes of honor affected me a lot and it began to appear in my stories. My work has had regular caste mentions. There was an incident where children refused to eat a lunch prepared by a Dalit worker. So you realize that it also affects children and that we are talking about the 21st century. These incidents are happening all over the country and that makes me angry every time.

I met Anubhav during the post-production of Mulk. Sudhir Mishra had said that Anubhav was looking for someone who could write the screenplay and the lyrics. But the project for which we met did not succeed.

Anubhav wrote a rough draft under the title Kanpur Dehat. I loved his soul and what he meant about the caste. But I told him, "If you want my presence on board, then I want to bring a lot of new things and I would like to change 80%." He was open to that. That's how we started writing this film last year around August. My first attempt was to make it a thriller because I felt it could not afford to be a social drama preached.

Q. Why then?

Because otherwise, the public to whom it is addressed becomes limited. You will only have this piece if intellectuals reading editorials are seated. Those who retweet the messages of each other. But this conversation does not come out of this room. This show becomes bigger with a movie, but such a movie is still a niche.

I was clear on this point and Anubhav was with me: we needed to present the film to a wider audience and, fortunately, the thrillers came to me naturally. So, I thought we should have a third girl who disappears, and the story also involves finding her, which gives a sense of hope. This suddenly made the story very interesting.

Q. What went into his research? Did this include talking to Dalit writers or activists?

We spoke to many journalists who worked on caste-based violence. I did not talk to any Dalit activist, even though I had read a lot. Anubhav spoke to a few people, who may not all have been Dalits, but who have been working on this issue for 20 years.

We then started to create characters. In the Anubhav project, Ayan (Ayushmann) and Brahmadatt (Manoj Pahwa) were already present. I brought Gaura (Sayani Gupta), Nishad (Zeeshan Ayyub) and Jatav (Kumud Mishra) and they are all very dear to me. The first 15 to 20 minutes of the film are drawn from his rough draft of which we rewrote the dialogues, but the rest of the story has been completely changed.

Nishad was so important to me that we were often afraid to distance ourselves. of history because of him. We had such a return from the team. As the scene at school with Nishad, we were told not to put this because it came out of the story. But we only made the film for him! It was so important to tell this story. Whatever he says in the film, that's why we made the film. Thus, despite the returns, we did not delete these parts, we rather included his story in the script.

Q. With the character of Jatav, you walked a thin line. While Dalits are internalized through caste because of the discrimination and atrocities to which they are subjected over the years, show to a Dalit who avoids his identity and refers to people in his community like the others can validate the prejudice of ourselves "this superior caste has always held out.

The character of Jatav is really interesting. He is one of those people in the system who would do no good or bad. Thus, his presence makes no difference. And since he is dalit, he also tries to remain discreet. He does not want to draw attention to himself. Because of this, he accumulated a lot of anger, but he also justified it. This scene where he says, "I am an initiate. I know that the problem of SC / ST, 'is very important because it explains how higher castes talk about it. He tries to justify it by saying, "People expect a Singham from me. But I can not because I only know how I made myself a place. "

I had in mind that maybe after studying and finding a job, he had to have tried to help other members of his community, which of course, he loved it, but slowly, the system made it difficult to live with his identity.This excludes you from the fact that you belong to this caste and that when trying to integrate, you are fleeing your identity

I had confidence in our dialogues and in Kumud to be able to portray his transformation. "Jhoothan of Om Prakash Valmiki, whom I read a few years ago, had a strong influence Anubhav and Ayushmann also read it during the film.

Q. Have you ever thought Was the story to be told from Nishad's point of view?

No, this has never been there. But Nishad was very important. In some ways, it was more important than Ayan. His scenes are mainly written by me. The conversation going on right now around Nishad, we wanted that to happen. I wanted people to miss him. So we thought that if we had less of him, the loss would be felt more.

You will feel incomplete because, even in reality, it is the same for these people. We read about them in newspapers or magazines, but let's move on quickly. They never receive 10 million followers or have them talk in prime time. Fortunately, thanks to Nishad, we could say a lot.

Zeeshan and I talked a lot about the character. We discussed contemporary Dalit politics and what Dalit youth thinks. We really love both Pash. If I have the opportunity, I would like to write a separate story of Nishad because it has a very interesting story. We used references from Rohith Vemula. Some people asked us why we had to do it, but we knew we wanted to have a conversation about it and that because of the movie, people also talk about Rohith. So we used a few lines of his letter.

Q. So, why was Ayan chosen as the protagonist?

Ayan is a superior caste, privileged man of North India, who has a beautiful heart but ignores the enormous privileges he enjoys. As he says to his girlfriend: "The Indian countryside is so beautiful" and the way he dresses and stands. The audience we wanted to talk about was precisely that. We knew that there was already a conscious and converted part of the audience, but the one that is apathetic, which includes a large male audience, we wanted to talk about through our protagonist because most of the time, people feel this that the protagonist feels.

I saw a documentary some time ago, where one guy is extremely angry about reservations and he says, "There is no more casteism in the country. Everyone is equal and there is no discrimination. The reporter asks him if he has a Dalit friend or if he knows a representative of SC / ST and he says no. That says a lot. So we wanted to connect to this guy, that maybe he was not a bad person but that his ignorance was a problem. So, if via Ayan, they understand the world, they could be sensitized.

Just before we started writing the screenplay, we seriously considered whether the protagonist could be a girl. I was excited about this, but when we started to develop the story, it became extremely important to establish Ayan 's privilege from the beginning. With a girl, even if she comes from a higher caste, this would not have been possible because she would always be more sensitive to gender and more aware than a man. For Anubhav and myself, it was important to show the privilege of Ayan because, whether he says it or not, no matter what happens in the system, people like Ayan are guilty of it.

Q. Aditi by Isha Talwar and her equation with Ayan are without a doubt one of the most progressive that has ever been seen on screen in Bollywood lately. What was his story? Is it part of the initial project?

The character has existed since the beginning but it has developed over time. In all my work, I am aware of my female characters. I am a man who writes female characters and I am afraid not to do what other Bollywood films have done with our female roles. I discuss these parts with my friends. I have an old friend whom I often show to my female characters to make sure I do not do something wrong. I pay special attention to what the women of the team and the actresses who play these roles have to say because often we make a mistake, even involuntarily.

There is a dialogue where Ayan tells Aditi that she is not looking at him how Gaura looks at Nishad. And I feared it was like a complaint, putting the burden of her feelings on her as if she were guilty of doing it. So, I told Ayushmann that he should say it so as not to look like this, and he should add a sentence: "Maybe I was missing something."

Q. The juxtaposition of this scene with that of Nishad and Gaura, where he regrets not being able to afford even a few moments together, is another example of the privilege enjoyed by the high caste.

What Ayan feels is a problem of primary importance. . He compares his love story to that of two people who are not even sure they can meet again!

Q. Brahmadatt, who is a rapist and murderer, is a dog lover. The difference between the way he treats the people who surround him and the love he spreads about pets is glaring. Has this aspect been chosen from what the country has experienced in recent years?

(Laughter). Type of. It's a way of showing the public what it does in real life. And it's funny to see how everyone finds this strange in a movie, but in real life, that's normal. So we had a chance there. Another reason was that it added another nuance to his character. Otherwise, he could have been another Bollywood villain. Kumud Mishra suggested we add a positive nuance to the character.

Q. With a caste in sight, the film has attempted to cover a range of issues, ranging from English elitism to politics in UP. Have you ever felt risky about touching too many things at the same time?

I wanted to say a lot more, but we could not. There was not much room to show urban caste bias, so we tried with a few things here and there. As for the scene about English elitism, the upper caste uses it as a tool to discriminate Dalits. English is today's Sanskrit.

Q. Although much of the film focuses on Ayan's rights, the last key moments in the story make him a hero who is the subject of criticism. The scene where he carries the third missing girl in his arms or the one where Gaura folded his hands to thank him.

The scene you mentioned and that of Ayan carrying the third girl did not unfold properly. Anubhav and I have discussed this a lot. I told him that Gaura should wear it because she is his sister and that Ayan should be in the background, because even with this change alone, we would pbad on a lot of it. Ayan did not do anything about this world. He just did his job. But it was director Anubhav's call to keep this scene that way.

Unconsciously, he could have had two reasons for doing so. First, it may have been a way of connecting with the mbades because there is a big star in the film for this scene to work for a wider audience. Moreover, before Mulk, he made movies with stars, so there is a reflection of that in this scene. We have never come to this debate. He did not find much of a problem in this scene. Even a scene before that when Ayan discovers the girl and Gaura is behind him, I wanted Gaura to take her instead in his arms. These were among the little disagreements we had but the last call is still taken by the director.

There was another scene with folding by hand and I told Anubhav during the badembly to remove it and he also agreed. Moreover, the Gaura in my mind was far more ferocious and angry than Anubhav thought. In her mind, she was a little scared. So, what Sayani played is undoubtedly the Gaura of Anubhav. Mine would never have crossed my hands in front of anyone.

Q. So how do you react to the criticism that the film suffers from the brahmin-savior complex?

I totally disagree with that. I hear about the anxiety of people and I do not say it to say they do not understand. I understand the space where they say that. But I want to say that this has never been our intention. If these scenes make you feel that way, please forgive us. Our intention was to start a conversation and to make sure that the story reaches a maximum of people. I would also like to ask people to look at what we did with the character of Nishad. I do not remember a traditional Hindi film, where the voice of a Dalit character was so strong. And I'm proud of it.

See also: "Article 15" once again emphasizes the need for greater diversity within Bollywood

Q. Do you think that the upper caste will come out of the movie feeling guilty?

I hope so. I hope at least some do it because that should be the goal. There is a scene where the character of Ashish Verma tells Gaura, "Hum maafi maangenge, baar baar maangenge". Maaf mat karna. 'These excuses come from all of us. If the upper caste feels this, it would be great.