Pathway to film honours
 

BY E. M. G. EDIRISINGHE

IT'S CUSTOMARY that the civilised world honours its accomplished artists. Reward with awards both at national and international level to them is a moment of elation, culturally and socially.

It is a grateful act of a nation for their wonderful contribution to mankind. It earns the artists, among all professions, annual awards for best performance in all areas of the field.

Only the religion is ennobled above art. Art is a reflection as well as a product of an advanced culture. It's an outer projection of man's inner development and composition. There is nothing that refined art cannot penetrate and capture in the inner mould of man.

Therefore, the artistes merit applause of the nation for their contribution to man and society both at intellectual and spiritual level.

Of all plaudits for artists, honours in cinema draw the broadest participation and highest adulation. Since it is the most popular medium of art, it embraces millions representing all sections of the people, and often comes under view, review and study of critics, viewers and all others.

A cinematic work that lines up for honours is a creation competent to stimulate intellectual absorption and critic evaluation. Its creative and appropriate use of cinematic techniques intrinsically reproduce a spirit that is transmitted to the enlightened viewer in an unambiguous cinematic language.

Forceful communication of the spirit of content must be plain and effective with the intention of the creator being clear and realistic featuring universal application.

A true artistic creation echoes an animated appreciative reaction among connoisseurs of art. Similarly, it leaves an elevated impression of taste. What it produces is not sensational, but spiritual and intellectual.

It's seldom that a creation springs complete in all aspects. In the circumstances, a panel of judges honouring the artists will have to move on to the next best; may be the best out of the pack presented to them.

Take film-script, for example. When a film is dissected, analysed and evaluated in bits and parts, none can grasp the totality of its beauty and fragrance that it enamates, and the spirit it holds.

When a script is considered for an award its impression on each member of the jury could vary; but, it's precisely this variation that earns merit for evaluation. That guides the panel and leads it to a proper assessment and a reading of the script.

When one evaluates a script, its basic characteristics such as dialogues, impact on the plot, dramatic build-up, continuity, decor, art-work, sets etc. come in with primary significance. Yet, consideration of these features one by one alone will not produce a correct evaluation.

The script as a whole with such features innately present and firmly ingrained, could only be a superb script.

When sound recording is considered for an award, its synchronisation, sound quality, technology, clarity, suitability of sound effects etc. become important needing close attention.

As in the case of script, here too the totality of the picture produced by these elements in the presentation is vital to determine the best sound-technician.

Moreover, with all these implements in hand, the director must have something worthwhile to tell the audience which is an artist's reflection on human relationship.

In the instance of awards, the focus is always on the film awardee who naturally becomes centralised with the judges, critics and the rest being justifiably marginalised.

Accord of an award is an occasion for a repeat gain of focus for the acclaimed creation. A legitimate evaluation of a creation is a realised only through critic appreciation or jury award.

Critic and intellectual applause for a work of art exposes the awardee to unblemish pride and self-elation. It is the honour of the jury and the esteem of the awarding authority that makes the awardee's pride respectable, acceptable and valuable.

How do the viewers receive the award? Cinema commands the widest audience response.

Therefore, whatever the award, it attracts keen audience, condescension.

As a practice, the picturegoers do not contemplate on who the best actor, best musician etc., is.

Therefore, once the awards are announced, that will activate the audience compelling them for a maiden or a repeat view of the acclaimed performance. Then onwards, the awardee rises in stature above the rest pushing himself almost to national elite status.

It's a panel of judges sitting together that take decisions on awards.

The panel constituents are essentially enlightened connoisseurs. They are endowed with both communicative efficiency and objective analytical skill.

On consideration for awards, individuality and identity of the creator stands aloof and buried behind his creation. The creator in person does not exist for the panel of judges.

It isn't difficult for an enlightened panel of judges with a high sense of appreciation and an adequate knowledge of the medium to pick the best talent for awards.

Knowledge of cinematic techniques will be an asset to the jury, but it ranks next to the presence of an analytical mind fortified by a deep sense for appreciation of art.

In other words, the jury members themselves too, are artists. They too create within, without giving it a tangible effect or a perceptible form. It is very important that the jury is upright and strong enough to boldly take fair and honest decisions.

This is particularly so in a small country like Sri Lanka. Here, occasions could arise where members of the jury might meet, converse or come in contact with various artists in our restricted social and cultural life.

In the circumstances, the jury must be firm and fair not to defile or darken the jury decisions under a cloak of extraneous factors other than pure merit, coming into consideration.

It is seldom that a jury take unanimous decisions. If the competition for an award is very keen and close, the division within the jury will be sharp and well stretched. Therefore, it is natural that there could be artists, critics or intellectuals who would differ from jury decisions.

There is nothing holy in their decisions; neither it does bring any discredit to anyone. However, anybody ventilating a counter-point or showing disagreement, should respect the decision of the jury, too.

Anyone entering a film competition should take both victory and defeat on the same stride and smile displaying grace, courage and equanimity. Anyway, dissenting judgements are common in our higher courts, too.

Panel of judges remain invisible until the final decisions are made known. Even thereafter, in the glamour and glitter of the awardees, the jury just blinks and glimmers.

Therefore, what is more important is not really the panel, but the institution or the authority which bestows the awards. So an award receives all-round honour and applause when the awarding authority is traditionally an esteemed institution known for dignity and integrity.

No jury can deliver a decision that satisfies everyone. However, from the awardee's point of view, whatever award is received, it brings him joy, glory and pride earned in positive acknowledgement of contribution to cinema and art.

The jury will be delighted and content if there is general acceptance of its decisions by critics and intellectuals.

In contrast, some irate artists may downgrade or reject an award which they have won; or spurn them with indignation. Though such instances are rare, it could arise due to personal or political reasons.

If the award is an annual event only the contributions within that year comes in for review with no bearing on any other previous work.

Though the norms may remain the same, the standards could change from year to year with the kind of work produced each year lined up for jury evaluation.

Receipt of an award is the zenith in the life of a professional artist. For viewers, it is an occasion to test their own standard of estimation.

It's a moment where film-fans applaud and acclaim their celluloid heroes and heroines in rapturous delight.

It is an event of grandeur where the artists as well as the connoisseurs together in common union, rejoice in an environment of charm and conviviality.

Right to write or speak against any jury decision unflappably exists for everyone from passionate film-fan to renowned critic. With that reservation in store, a festival of film awards is a delectable occasion where millions bound to cinema are rocked in one single raving flock.

Though it is the easiest to make no awards, certainly it is not the best. The jury has the right for an overview but not for an overrun.