Maya (2001)

Watching Maya made me think of spirited discussions I have had on the BollyWHAT? forums about the films of Deepa Mehta, like Fire and Water.  Some critics charge that Mehta's films are exploitative and manipulative - that they pander to a patronizing Western art-house audience by portraying India as a backward, unsophisticated, vicious and superstitious monolith.  I strongly disagree with this assessment of Deepa Mehta's films  - I find them nuanced, allegorical, and rich.  If I ever have seen a film that merited this criticism, though, it's Maya.

Sanjay (Nikhil Yadav) and his cousin Maya (Nitya Shetty) are carefree village kids.  They spend their days creating trouble, as kids will, throwing rocks and stealing sweets.  They are gently scolded, but clearly loved, by Sanjay's mother (Mita Vasisht) and father (Anant Nag).  Their life is idyllic and warm.  But when Maya reaches puberty, everything changes in the space of just a few days.  The family heads to the neighboring village of Maya's parents to prepare for a mysterious ceremony marking Maya's transition to womanhood.  Maya, who only dimly understands what happening to her, is told that she is no longer a child, and discouraged from her familiar play with Sanjay.  Sanjay, with even less understanding, chafes against the separation from his playmate and acts out, angering his father.  Then, when the day of the ritual arrives, over the terrified protests of Sanjay, Maya is subjected to a trauma that is truly shocking and horrible.    

It is shocking and horrible - but perhaps only tenuously related to any real practice.   We are told by a title card at the very end of the film that no particular practice has been portrayed; instead, the film is loosely inspired by a variety of religious practices that may or may not still be in currency.  Indeed, the film is vague about both time and place, leaving me wondering what its point was supposed to be.  All we are shown is an exaggeratedly horrific abuse of an innocent child taking place somewhere in India, amongst a village full of adults complicit in the horror.  No one, not even a token character - except a powerless small child who doesn't even understand what is going on - stands up and speaks against the horrors that are presented as accepted and commonplace religious ritual, or even questions them in the slightest. 

The result is a film without depth, without allegory, without a message; a film that serves only to shock and disturb its audience with some vaguely presented notion of Indian village life and unspecified, mysterious rituals performed in the name of Hindu gods.  The nature of the ritual is kept mysterious until the film's climax, and no explanation or justification is offered - what is the rationale behind the practice?  Are all girls subjected to it?  If so, why?  If not, how are girls selected - why is Maya selected?  The complete absence of information or context reinforces the impression that the film's principal goal is to shock rather than to enlighten.  Maya could have had depth; it could have made a compelling point about the status of women in rural India, about progress that has been made and steps that still need to be taken.  Instead, it's just nasty and shocking and not a whole lot else.  It's a terrible waste of so much potential - a waste a talented cast, especially the child actors; a waste of a realistic (up to a point) glimpse of village life; a waste of some very lovely cinematography.  Maya is a truly disappointing film.

Maya is available for download at Jaman.com, but I can't say I'd recommend it. 
 

Comments

[maajhi]

I don't know what would make you pick movies like this. And I'd stay away from Deepa Mehta as well. They all have the same objective and the same cinematic vision. I try to look at their products in a sympathetic light by thinking it might have to do with their histories in India; they may have suffered abuse and are only trying to hit back. The saddest, though expected part is the way the West raises them up on a pedestal for this simplistic Freudian output.

[carla]

Well, as I said, I disagree about Deepa Mehta, and I don't see her films - which I love - as negative or hostile. I think I explained in this review why I found *Maya* more shallow and exploitative than any of Deepa Mehta's films, which are rich with allegory and offer characters with diverse perspectives, everything that *Maya* lacked.

[Nina]

Thanks for that post, since it echoes what I felt, and I am comforted not to be alone in this. I found Maya very well made and acted. However, the abuse sceen was deeply upsetting, and I was left wondering why I had been subjected to it if it was in fact a made-up practice, as the film stated. It left the film without a message -- just a traumatic experience.

[Sundus]

Dear Carla,
I was completely unaware of what I was getting myself into when I checked this movie out of our public library... yes! out of all the 3 Indian films in the whole public library system, this is one (which I find very dangerous and sad not to find other examples of Indian cinema). I must admit I was deeply bothered by the scene of the atrocity, I wasn't able to continue looking, and the audio of the scene is just horrible. I ended up being upset at the end of the film. I also felt that it was such a waste of talent in the cast, and also in the photography, I got to enjoy several scenes when the kids are playing, and enjoy feeling part of the household watching their interactions. The film could have been a great victory of the parallel cinema. I am always looking for films that drift away from the typical Bollywoodesque style, and finding Maya made me really upset. I feel that many Library users are willing to check this movie out for the sake of learning about Indian culture, and what a disappointment and horror will they experience! I concur this movie is not comparable with Mehta's films. Being a Latinamerican woman, I can understand the importance of looking at ourselves with all mirrors, and accept our failures in order to move on as people, but Maya only serves to feed the stereotypes of Indian life and culture that unfortunately still flood the U.S. general mentality.

[Ashley]

Yes, I almost rented this film before knowing a lot about Indian cinema. I'm so glad now that I didn't bother. It would have upset me to no end.

However, as for what I've read on the film, isn't it about the practice of "Devadasi's"? (see wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Devadasi )

If this is so, then it does in fact still continue in India, however is strongly discouraged by most people and Devidasis no longer seem to carry the social status that they once did many years ago.

I also read that this film was very unfair and one-sided as to how it treated the practice. On a general basis, most of the "initiation" or "deflowering" ceremonies are not encouraged, however they unfortunately still happen in select places.

Still, the general population of India is as genuinely shocked by the practice as anyone from any other country.
Every country has it's dirty laundry.

[carla]

Ashley, thanks for your comment.

I don't think the film is "about" the practice of Devdasi. The film itself says at the end that it is based upon an amalgam of several practices, one of which is Devdasi. But it is not "about" any one of them, in the sense that it (as I explained in the review) doesn't offer any education or perspective about the practice - it's just used as a horrible, mysterious (and possibly fictionalized) plot device that every single character in the movie, save the two children, are utterly complicit in.

I am not saying that bad things don't happen in India, and I'm not saying that films shouldn't be made about such things. But the fact that *Maya* is a film about a bad thing that may or may not happen in India doesn't make it a good film. If the film was aiming to do anything but shock - to teach, to elicit sympathy, to raise awareness - it completely failed to do that.

[Ashley]

I completely agree with you, just thought I'd bring what little insight I had on it. :-)