View source for Vijayalakshmi (1946)

{| class="wikitable"
|-
|colspan="0"|<div style="font-size:100%">
This is a collection of articles archived for the excellence of their content.<br/>
</div>
|}

[[Category:India |V ]]
[[Category:Cinema-TV-Pop  |V ]]



=Tale of India’s first demonetisation=
''Vijayalakshmi'' was a Tamil feature film made in 1946.


[http://epaperbeta.timesofindia.com/Article.aspx?eid=31808&articlexml=Little-known-film-from-1946-brilliantly-tells-a-19112016016010  Vamanan,  Little-known film from 1946 brilliantly tells a tale of the first demonetisation, Nov 19 2016 : The Times of India]


When a measure like de monetisation that af fects all peo ple comes into play , you can be sure it will be factored into films in a variety of ways in the times to come. Film is a mass medium and a mass happening is certain to find echoes in it. In fact, the very first demonetisation in India that took place in 1946 figures brilliantly in a little known film of the period. The film, `Vijayalakshmi', flopped when it was released, but ironically it is perhaps the only film of 1946 to have survived 70 turbulent years since it saw the light of day .

Though named eponymously after its female protagonist, the film is dominated by the avaricious father-in-law Ganapathi Iyer, who finds his nemesis in the demonetisation of thousand rupee notes. In a superbly crafted climax that is based on superimpositions, unconventional camera angles and evocative music, the character that marries the religiosity of the priestly class with the greed of the loan shark finds superb evocation. Based on a Marathi stage play , `Bandaachi Soon', written by playwright Ganesh Krishna Shastri Pathak, Vijayalakshmi was directed by the veteran filmmaker P Pulliah, most famous for directing N T Rama Rao in the iconic mythological Sri Venkateswara Mahatyam (1960). Ironically , Vijayalakshmi is on the other end of the spectrum, being for most part a delightful vehicle of cinematic realism that presents credible characters and situations.

[[Boodgur Ramakrishnaiah Panthulu]]  , known more as producer director of seminal films like `Veerapandiya Kattabommon', `Kappalottiya Thamizhan', `Karnan' and Aayirathil Oruvan', if not for ` his essay of the role of `School Master', excels himself in a riveting portrayal of greed. With the varied palette of a practised actor, he brings facial expres sions, as well as mannerisms of speech and gait to make the character of the miserly Ganapathi come alive.

After his religiously conducted Lakshmi Puja, which is more a gloating over accumulated riches in his iron safe than any devotion to the goddess of wealth and prosperity , Ganapati Iyer receives a letter from his son Ramu. He begins to utter mournful cries learning that Ramu has resigned his job. Questioned by his wife, he says, `Praanan Poana Enna, Panam Poana Enna, Rendum Onnu thaanedi' (Losing money is akin to losing one's life), underlining his philosophy of life with the skewed equation that wealth equals life.

This immediately leads to exploitation and ill-treatment of women, of course with the complicity of other women, as is to be expected in a patriarchal society with scant respect for the rights or feelings of women. Prodded by his wife, Ganapati Iyer sends his daughter-in law packing to her father's place so that he can make more money getting his son married a second time. “ A two-stringed gold necklace, all the silver ware, and 10,000 as dowry for the second marriage. I can put away another 15,000 rupees in my safe,“ he chuckles happily , gloating over future acquisitions! Note hungry Ganapati is of the kind that invites the woes of demonetisation.

The year 1946 was a challenging one for the film industry with famine conditions prevailing in parts of the then Madras Presidency and the introduction of 12 ounce ration of rice. The demonetisation of 500, 1000 and 10,000 notes also hit the money bags financing the film industry as it did the stars who received part of the payment in black. Though the introduction of prohibition in eight districts of the Presidency made it seem that favourable conditions had been created for the film trade, there was actually little enthusiasm at the box office.

=See also=
[[Boodgur Ramakrishnaiah Panthulu ]]