The plot of the movie follows an 8-year-old girl, Chuyia, in 1938 India. As still happens around the country (although technically illegal then and now) she has been married off at a very young age to a much older man. The movie opens with her father telling her that she is now a widow (which means as little to her as the fact that she was married). He has her head ceremonially shaved and takes her to an ashram (call it a religious retreat) for widows. There Chuyia will be expected to live for the rest of her life, eating one meal a day, praying, and begging in the street. It's not a prison... the women could leave whenever they want, but honestly, they have nowhere else to go.
Chuyia meets (and introduces us to) the other major characters in the film one at a time. There is the very large and very stern Madhumati, a widow from an upper class who has taken over the position of superiority and "management" of the ashram. Patiraji is an extremely old toothless woman who has been there since she was a child and now dreams of the simple pleasures of eating a forbidden sweet pastry.
Shakuntala is a serious and quiet woman of great faith and devotion to duty. And living apart from the rest in a spartan wood shack is Kalyani. Kalyani is a shock. Unlike the rest of the women who have shaved heads, sunken cheeks, and are generally older than 40, she is a beauty in her mid-20's with flowing black hair and perfect skin and teeth. We learn later why Kalyani is special to Madhumati and the upkeep of the ashram. But the important point is that she becomes a girlfriend/older sister to Chuyia.
Chuyia one day is outside the ashram on the main city streets and runs into Narayan, a man also in his mid-20's and a progressive follower of Gandhi (who is just becoming publicly prominent and starting to promote nationalism to take the country out of British rule). Narayan and Kalyani find themselves attracted to each other and eventually they have to deal with their desire to be together versus religious and societal pressures to stay apart because of Kalyani's status.
Article comments
1 - Mayank Austen Soofi
Nice review. This film, as was expected, has a history of controversy behind it here in India. ‘Water’ was originally planned to be made in the holy city of Benares, on the ghats of the river Ganges, where there are several old mansions that houses the real widows (Benares widow houses had also found a evocative description in Salman Rushdie’s ‘Midnight’s Children’). But Hindu conservative parties accused the director Deepa Mehta of causing religious offense and complained of portraying the religion in bad light. The demonstrations had turned violent forcing Ms Mehta to wrap up her team. She called it an off.
She later went on to make ‘Earth’ (about Indian partition; the film was based on Pakistani author Bapsi Sidhwa’s classic novel ‘Cracking India) in Delhi. ‘Water’ was made, as the reviewer mentioned, in Sri Lanka - away from the spotlight of those who believe (mistakenly) that by raising questions about the bad practices of a religion is akin to spoiling its reputation.
2 - Apollo
The dumbness of westerners whenever u speak of India or Hinduism never ceases to amuse me :). I simply don't understand why u need to take a marxist with a "Hindu" name so seriously?
Do u know what the likes of mehta will say about u Americans behind ur backs? They call u capitalist pigs and ur women as whores.
And turning towards u they call Indians as "Hindu extremists".
I'am not going to waste my time pointing to the factual inaccuracies in ur article except one to show where u stand.
"Chuyia one day is outside the ashram on the main city streets and runs into Narayan, a man also in his mid-20's and a progressive follower of Gandhi (who is just becoming publicly prominent and starting to promote nationalism to take the country out of British rule)."
If the movie is set in 1938. then Gandhi has been "prominent" in India for nearly 22 years already.
sorry for being harsh. but just for a moment think Why did u Americans own Slaves a 100 years ago?
DO u think it was a social evil or ur "religious scriptures" demanded that a good American should own slaves and whip them regularly?