Dilip Kumar: A Non-Fan’s Tribute

I was never a Dilip Kumar fan. He was someone who always resided on the periphery of my consciousness, as a totemic figure to be revered in an abstract way. Everyone around me paid their mandatory tributes to him from time to time, and while his position on some distant pedestal remained unchallenged, one rarely felt a compulsion to get better acquainted with his work. Part of the reason was of course the fact that for a 60s-born like me, his era had already receded into the sepia past, and the moniker ‘Tragedy King’ was not motivating enough for an adolescent to try and catch up on his films.

It was only years later that one started truly appreciating his unique abilities and recognized the impact that he made on successive generations. But at the time when it mattered most, when one consumed films with a hunger that could not be sated, when one did not critique films but lost oneself in them, when one was trenchantly uncritical in one’s choices, when changing two buses to get to a theatre, waiting in line for an hour in the midsummer sun to get advance tickets to a Himmatwala or Dharam-Veer felt like a privilege, at that time Dilip Kumar meant little to me.?

The same was not the case with his contemporaries. Dev Anand was a favourite, and his films along with those of Shammi Kapoor were the staple when it came to morning shows. Apart from TV, the morning show was the alcove that the past placed in the then-present and this was the one slot where one was a little choosy about one’s selection of films. Dev Anand played characters that did not age; the idea of an impressionable young man getting tempted by the big bad city, while exuding irresistible charm to a variety of attractive young women was an archetype that made as much sense in the 70s as it did two decades earlier. Also, Dev Anand was still making films that meant something at the box office- his Hare Rama Hare Krishna and Johnny Mera Naam were bona fide hits even as his older films stayed relevant.??

And in Raj Kapoor’s case, somehow one caught almost all his work on TV. Both Dev Anand and Raj Kapoor were also film makers, and that helped keep them at the forefront of one’s consciousness. It also helped that the characters played by both Dev Anand and raj Kapoor tended to follow their own, more predictable arcs.??Dilip Kumar, on the other hand, given his versatility and selectiveness, was not that easy to grasp.

The first Dilip Kumar film that I saw on the big screen was Gopi, which is perhaps not the most stellar presence in the constellation of his work. Personally, it is only with his second innings as a character actor that one saw Dilip Kumar as a living presence. And the experience was a mixed one. It was clear that one was seeing an accomplished actor, Hindi cinema’s only one who earned the sobriquet ‘thespian’, but there were films where he seemed to be trying too hard. Perhaps unfairly, one felt that something about being a character actor as against the protagonist made him play those roles with a heavier hand than was his usual style.?

His performances in films like Kranti, Vidhaata, Saudagar and Karma are not what he is likely to be remembered by. But the film where one caught a glimpse of what made him stand apart was Shakti, where Dilip Kumar used silence and stillness in a manner only he could to bring alive to perfection his portrayal of a tortured father unable to express love for his son.?

In truth, my generation experienced Dilip Kumar most powerfully through his absence. Every time a popular actor flared his nostrils, and flashed red-rimmed ayes at the world, he knew as did we, that he was not Dilip Kumar. Once Dilip Kumar had set the standard for what acting could be, he could never be forgotten, even when his influence was ignored. In virtually every acclaimed performance that we have seen over the years, there has been a tiny bit of Dilip Kumar that has been channeled.?

The Hindi film hero does not act, he performs. Dilip Kumar let the character emerge from within himself, without applying any force. The emotional power of his performance came not from what he did but what he exuded. That not only did the industry but the audience recognize his ability and put him on a pedestal not merely as a gifted actor but as a popular matinee idol is testimony to the fact that however commercial cinema might be in India, and despite the low benchmarks that have been set for acting in the country, true talent gets the respect that is its due.

As for my own relationship with his films, like many of my generation, one has over the years got the opportunity to see most of his earlier work and develop an appreciation for just what he brought to the table by his thoughtful deeply interiorized representations. Among all the various shades of characters played by him, my personal preference is for the breezy Dilip Kumar who is having fun as against all his other more acclaimed roles.?

To call it the end of an era when someone influential dies is a matter of form, but in this case, it is truly an era that is finally behind us. The first lot of cinematic heroes who defined what powerful stars could mean to us has now finally passed away. History can take many forms, but the one that feels most real is that which resides inside us, as a jungle of memories and associations. In that historical sense, the past has lost a pillar that propped up our sense of yesterday. With the passing of Dilip Kumar, a vital part of us is now firmly in the past.

(this is a version of an article that has appeared in the Times of India)