Why Dilip Kumar shall remain important to cinema of India

The passing away of Dilip Kumar was kind of anticipated for quite some as he was in and out of hospital in the last few years, quite often. The thespian was 98 years old, and it spoke of the tenacity of the man in cinema and life too. He was not the one with a large filmography. Just 60 of them and they were enough for a generation and thereafter to remember him and his work. A lot of yesteryear stars from Amitabh Bachchan to much later Shahrukh Khan swear by his name and acting. Three things that stood out in his acting was the dialogue delivery, nuanced approach to acting and finally his body language. Each one left a long-standing impression. His contemporaries, Raj Kapoor and Dev Anand had also developed their own style. Raj Kapoor was often compared to Chaplin and Dev Anand to Gregory Peck. In that respect, Dilip Sahab managed to create a unique space for himself. 

The 50's brought in these faces to Hindi cinema, which had till then witnessed, Ashok Kumar, Prithviraj Kapoor, and Motilal during the late 30's and 40's. The cinema of 1930's which also witnessed Talkies coming in, was in an experimentalize mode, since actors and actresses were getting used to the idea of sound and dialogues in films. Therefore, it was a phase of trial and error. Also, the themes were then more on the lines of mythology which had audience trying to connect stored memory with the viewing experience. Sometimes, if the theme was social with a message the approach was connecting real life to reel life. 

With the advent of 50's there was distinct changes in the society. The concept of Jai Jawan Jai Kisan was coming in. Farmers were important to film but so did the issues like migration of labour, landless labour and their problems, illiteracy, caste issues and oppressions, the birth of the local Munim (who gave out loans on steep interest), and several other perils of society which was on the verge of growth was witness too. City life and their challenges, the problems of mill workers and the high social and economic cost of living in the city, added to several films of the 50's and thereafter. 

This was also the time when Hindi cinema was experimenting with a lead character or a Hero as they said. A character who could rise from the dust or ashes after having suffered enough through the 120-150 minutes of narration. He was the do-gooder or the wronged one or the one who was always on the margin of the society. The hero had to suffer and yet he had to stand firm on his principles. At times, he had to let go several things in the bargain, but as a Hero he had to remain firm on his ground. Later, in the 70’s and thereafter things changed though.  

It was a role which needed conviction and believability. It needed a certain kind of screen presence and a certain kind of style and mannerism which the audience would be able to relate to. Dilip Kumar, Raj Kapoor and Dev Anand were the three important part of Hindi cinema at that point in time who brought in all the requisite amount of panache needed for the characters. Dilip Sahab came from undivided India, and his flair for Urdu and oratory was something he had complete command on. It played to his advantage as the script writers, dialogue writers and the screenplay writers or even the lyricist came from staunch background with Urdu as the base. Dilip Sahab and his dialogue delivery particularly shone particularly for the command he had on the language and way he stylized. 

Imagine the lines from Devdas, where he says, कौन कंबख्त है जो बर्दाश्त करने के लिए पीता है, मैं तो पीता हूं ताकि सांस ले सकूं; the depth in the delivery cannot be brought out by anyone else, except for someone who has command over the language. Later, in his role as Salim in the cult classic Mughal-E-Azam, he brought in a stylized format to playing mythological characters of King and prince, which till today is followed by stars. Sampler: watch very closely the part of Akbar played by Hrithik Roshan in Jodhaa Akbar to get an understanding of what Dilip Sahab did to Hindi cinema. He brought in a genre which was and is still followed by many while playing a role of the king in Hindi cinema. 

There have been critics who have talked about his over-the-top dialogue delivery and acting. In his second innings particularly, with Kranti, Saudagar, Mashaal to name a few, the performances were hyped and over the top. However, one must understand the context in which cinema was being looked as a medium of communication. Cinema and viewing are a cognitive process where the experience is biological, ecological, emotional, and cognitive. In this cognition process, the setting is also important to look at. In a closed space with 300-400 people sitting in a dark hall the experience is important. And, especially when I am coming for destressing myself. After a day’s work and the stress, cinema remained a form of entertainment which helped me ease off.  

The 70's and the 80's therefore was all about over the top performance and kitschy films which provided more about good over bad and less about message. Dilip Kumar, Raj Kumar, Nana Patekar (Much later though), Shatrughan Sinha, Amitabh Bachchan, Dharmendra to name some were all known for over-the-top performance. And perhaps that was the need of the hour. 

Yet, one must believe that Dilip Kumar and his contribution to Hindi cinema was important at a time when cinema was looking for a way to express itself; it was looking for a face to project itself; it was looking for a character to set the context; it was looking for a performance to benchmark itself. Dilip Kumar fit that perfectly and his time between 1950's-60's remained the glorious period of Hindi cinema and that of his. 

Let us remain indebted to the man and the beauty of his roles he played. As someone said, Yusuf Khan died but Dilip Kumar lives on. Relive him with the classic, Madhumati my all-time favorite or in Kohinoor for the brilliant picturization of the song, Madhuban mein Radhika naache re! They both stream on YouTube.