Malini Fonseka:

Living legend of Sri Lankan cinema

Dhammika DISSANAYAKA

Most efficacious Sri Lankan example of a ‘Film Actress’ is Malini Fonseka. Studying her character itself is a study of the character of Sri Lankan film actress; it is so extensive and fruitful. At times it appears that it is too late to have tried our hand in doing so or does it appear we are too early for it. However, when we see the cluster of films with entertainment content and artistic value in which she performed different roles, it appears that this is the right time to make an assessment of a career spanning over four decades. On the other hand, she continues to act.

A new era in her career as an artiste has dawned. She has bid good-bye to the adoring young girl and continues to enliven the character of Sri Lankan woman, which is far more onerous and greater in depth than those of the lover. Within this changes environment, she found plenty of scope. That deepens our sphere of appreciation of her part in cinema, too. Yet, she had not gone that far on this path. So her early years in cinema is still uncomparable with her later years in the field because the sources that enlighten us on those years is inadequate. On the other hand, instances of landmarks in her career are discernible only in the achievements reached in the later years. Within this context, it appears that a definition of Malini Fonseka today is incomprehensive. However, an evaluation of her accomplishments so far, would certainly be useful for comprehensive research in the future.

Memories

In the one hundred and twenty five years of history of thespian tradition of woman, Malini Fonseka has excelled above everyone during the past forty years. Memories of her performances are everlasting. Anecdotes relating to her long journey in the career, assumes such great proportions strong enough to draw our attention. Until Anna (Prera) Kannangara acted in C. Don Bastian’s play ‘Romleen’ (‘Romleen’ Nadagama was initially staged on September 26, 1885), the women not only were debarred from performing on stage, but even watching a play too, was taboo for them. Then, men were the substitutes for roles of women. After Anna who was the first to appear on stage, it was Rukmani Devi who came to the scene in 1939. She joined the Minerva Theatre Group and became the darling of the theatre overnight.

Malini Fonseka enters into the void created by Rukmani Devi, but reaches an unprecedented height much beyond what Rukmani had reached. Male monopoly of the theatre itself was one reason for drawing women into the art of acting. Shades of this male dominance continued to remain upto the time Malini entered the theatre scene.

Debut on stage

When she made her entry, resistance from make chauvanism was not altogether over. Social pressure against women on stage which Rukmani Devi had to confront had been softened to mere domestic resistance at the time Malini was to make her debut on stage. There was a social demand for feminine presence on stage and there Malini had a smooth consecration. Abraham Silva, a Tower Hall Theatre actor objected vehemently to his first granddaughter Malini Fonseka becoming an actress. His own daughter did not become an actress, mainly because of the social antipathy prevailing at the time for women taking part in dramas. It was Abraham Silva who scripted the ‘Belasantha Nadagama’. Although Malini’s mother failed to become an actress due to her father’s objections Malini succeeded in making a breakthrough.

Social recognition

Malini had registered her maiden thespian presence on stage. Yet, she gains social recognition as a film actress. Although both Rukmani Devi and Malini Fonseka had their baptism on stage, their careers as actresses round popular cinema. Rukmani Devi wherever she performed was the favourite among the theatregoers; but, Malini on the other hand, did not last long on stage because at the time she entered the stage, cinema was more popular with the viewers than the theatre. When Rukmani Devi graced the wide screen, cinema was technically not so advanced and the quality of cinema was not in contention at the time.

Malini makes her entry to cinema when it was already a popular and powerful audiovisual medium. A comparison of Malini’s thespian performance with that of the artistes who preceded her is useful at this point. There are several factors that put Malini above Rukmani in this stream of art. Primarily, untimely death of Rukmani robed us of her talent. However, Malini who filled the vaccum has redefined her art. That is precisely one reason as to why we should not consider this evaluation is premature and may be even preposterous.

Acting on stage and in cinema are two different arts. There is a live contact between the stage and the spectator in theatre, but in the medium of cinema, technology comes in between the actor and the spectator. Malini had an advantage in this respect. Photography and Cinema technology was superior when she graced the silver screen. Rukmani was not fortunate in this regard. Malini did not experience that technological advantage when she was on stage enlivening dozen characters. At the rate the stage artistes migrating into cinema the domain of cinema artistes do not opt for theatre. Theatre is a more suitable forum for learning and studying the art of acting than cinema. The experience Malini gathered on stage was instrumental in moulding her characterisations on the silver screen and enhancing the capacity to attract filmgoers into whatever the character she portrayed.

Outstanding success

Malini Fonseka was recognized with the best actress award at the National Drama Festival held in 1965 for her performance in the stage drama ‘Akal Wessa’. That was her first step into a memorable future with outstanding success in the impressive field of acting. In the mid ‘60s theatre provided better opportunities for artistes to achieve excellence than cinema which was still dominated by the production of commercially viable formula films.

To be continued

(The writer is a lecturer, Music Faculty, Visual and Performing Arts University)