Page 24 - THE CHANGING WORLD OF RAY

keep a distance in the form Charulata, and Siddhartha

of the detached perspective in Pratiwaldi). For Arendt,

of the Apu-Eye. However, I this form of impersonal

would argue that Ray’s a-po- alienation was the result

litical stand is a fusion of of the rise of the capitalist

world-politics with the tran- economy in which the con-

quil philosophy of ‘Inaction’ cepts of ‘society’ and ‘social
(Ganguly 2000: 113); a type solidarity’ (as in Durkheim

of Aristoteleian politics that 1893), with all its malice,

is both personal and univer- poverty, unemployment,

sal. This personal philosophy and social indifference, re-

is ethically reflected upon placed the protective, tradi-

practical and social matters, tional structures of family
including the importance of and private property (Ar-

access to education (Pather endt 1998/1958: 254-257).

Panchali), gender equality This sense of alienation and

(Mahanagar ), access to jobs longing is underlying the

(Pratidwandi), and public motives of several charac-

health (as in Ray’s adap- ters, from Apu’s mother to
tation of Ibsen’s ‘Enemy of Charu’s loneliness, and from

People’ in Ganashatru 1989). Kalikinkar’s sexual frustra-

tions to Siddhartha’s social

Humanism as a Cri- alienation. Their visions and
Humanism as a Cri
-
psyches, enriched with ar-
tique of Modernity
tique of Modernity
chetypal symbolism (Jung),

reflect upon the collective
Following Weber’s consciousness (Durkheim)

writings on modernity as a and the historical conscious-

process of wealth accumu- ness (Dilthey) of the re-

lation, Arendt highlighted spective time and place of

a collective feeling of alien- each film. In this sense, the

ation from the world (as also director auteur becomes a
illustrated by the characters charismatic historian of a

of Doya in Devi, Charu in
world history (Weber), whose