Do clowns give you the creeps?

image source:www.inquistr.com 

“Kill you all!" The clown was laughing and screaming. "Try to stop me and I'll kill you all! Drive you crazy and then kill you all! You can't stop me!” I'm every nightmare you've ever had. I am your worst dream come true! I am everything you ever were afraid of!

― From the novel “It” by Stephen King

America and Europe are getting panicky over alleged ‘creepy clown’ sightings. But why are clowns scaring people instead of making them laugh? Read on…

Shakespeare was perhaps one of the earliest persons to use the word ‘clown’, to describe dim witted and dumb characters his plays. The advent of the form of the present circus clown – with painted face, red ball nose and loose clothes – is supposed to have started in around the 19^th century in Europe. 

The general images of clowns in movies were those of people who lived two lives – one where they made fools of themselves and others, as jesters and their own private lives, which were anything but funny. The private lives of many such people – remember Charlie Chaplin and many such comedians in India too – were melancholia driven. 

This was until 1978, when a certain John Wayne Gacy, Jr. (March 17, 1942 – May 10, 1994), was caught by police in Illinois, USA, for being involved in various rapes and serial killings (numbering 33, according to the police). Now, Gacy worked as a clown (named ‘Pogo’) and was one of the funny people who the kids could relate to. He also used to draw and paint picture of clowns. The police were shocked to know as to why he worked as a clown - "You know… clowns can get away with murder.”  He was finally killed by lethal injection in 1994. He became infamous as the ‘Killer Clown.’

Now, this became a subject for our Hollywood friends – who are always on the lookout for novel crimes – to adapt to movies. Many of us would have seen Steven Spielberg’s ‘Poltergeist’ – remember the scene of the doll under the bed? Stephen King’s novel ‘It’, which was also adapted into a movie in 1990, had a clown killer. A recent one I can remember watching was the horror ‘Amusement’ (2009). I have not watched ‘All Hallows' Eve’, which is a 2013 horror movie featuring a killer clown.

Movies-inspire-life-inspires-movies – the quintessential “chicken and egg”story? One does not know which leads to what; but a criminal is obviously inspired by something other than just indigenous instinct. 

An matter of intrigue -  why did the clown as a killer gain acceptance among the public? A clown is a person who hides his appearance. He wears such make up whereby you cannot see his true face. In addition, the psyche of him hiding his identity and feelings becomes believable. So the clown as the scaring prankster turned psychopathic killer is a subject that a book reader / movie watcher is able to relate to. The clown can be a serial killer – it is almost as if the clowns in movies cannot have normal lives; there has to be a duality somewhere, even barbaric. The killer clown gives you the creeps – guaranteed! Maybe there is a lot of sarcasm and sadism in his laugh.

This has led to real life tragedies - one cannot forget the mass shooting in 2012 in a movie theatre in Colorado where, the killer did so, dressed as the character ‘Joker’ at the premiere of the Batman movie ‘The Dark Knight’. The tragic irony was that the clown was the killer in the movie too!

Presently, such ‘creepy clown’ sightings are growing across the USA and even Europe; alarming even the police who have now started issuing advisories to the pranksters to keep off. Do you know who are affected as a result of all these? The persons who really work as clowns for a living – they would be hoping that the hysteria stops at some point, for sanity’s sake!

Praktan (The Ex)

If you really love somebody
More than you have ever loved me
Walk away, please go

I can feel your body with me
I can feel your touch
The warmth of your breath
Upon my neck I love so much
But your mind is somewhere else
You are not with me
Go and find your happiness I set you free
 

- From the song ‘Tumi jake bhaloboso’ (Praktan (Bengali), 2016)

We don't talk anymore...... we don't laugh anymore...... like we used to do...

- Charlie Puth & Selena Gomez in 'Nine Track Mind'

Scene 1:

It is X’s birthday. X is waiting for the spouse Y to come, perhaps with a surprise gift. Y keeps X waiting, waiting and waiting. When the clock strikes 12, which is when the next day is officially born, Y comes in. X confronts Y , who has nothing but weak excuses. After a point of time the argument turns heavy and perhaps even violent. Two bruised hearts hit the sack. You can imagine X to be a lady and Y to be a man or vice versa.

Scene 2:

X (a lady) goes for a job, a higher earning one than her spouse Y. She comes home with a planned holiday. Y refuses to go citing it is the woman who has sponsored the tour. Yes, this also gives way to an argument. Two really hurt hearts hit the sack.

Scene 3:

X (a lady) has got a promotion, and to celebrate, buys gifts for her husband Y. She comes home and breaks the good news to her husband, who, instead of patting her back and celebrating along with her, admonishes her, ostensibly angry with the increase in her earning capacity and move up the ladder, even accusing her of sleeping with her boss! (He even checks her messages as a result of his suspicious nature) No prizes for guessing what happens next.

Scene 4:

X and Y plan a holiday. X says that he (or, she) would join Y in a day, but refuses to turn up. This breaks Y’s trust in X completely.

Scene 5:

X is pregnant but is made to hide her pregnancy and made to visit all relatives by the mother in law which results in a miscarriage. The man comes home to learn that this happened but did not do anything which could have saved her from the physical and mental trauma.

All the aforesaid situations are scenes from the latest Bengali blockbuster Praktan (The Ex). What is common in all the situations above? I believe none of the situations had any scope for a gun powder like situation, but were made into to be potentially inflammatory by parties that matter, resulting in an implosion and eventual breakdown of a relationship. Each such situation chips off the already crumbling block that is marriage finally cracking and crashing it altogether.

Over the weekend, I watched the movie, a pretty decent take on relationships from directors Shiboprasad Mukherjee and Nandita Roy.  

What happens when you run into your ex suddenly and have to spend the course of your journey with him/her, where in addition to the unexpected meeting, you also get to meet the new spouse of your ex and start wondering as to what could have gone right in your marriage? In this movie, the lady revisits her marriage with her ex during the course of a two-day train journey between Mumbai and Kolkata.

Dipa, played by Rituparna Sengupta, is a conservation architect based in Bombay. While interning in Kolkata, she falls in love with a charismatic walking tour guide Ujaan (Prosenjit Chatterjee). They marry and she moves to his home, adjusting her life, even giving up the city she grew in. She obviously makes more money than him. Catfights give way to strong arguments to ego clashes and you know where the marriage is going to head. To be fair to the lady, she adjusts with the family. The husband is a chauvinist, who does not miss an opportunity to put her down, hurt her and make her feel bad about herself. He constantly reminds her, in an obnoxious manner, the fact that she earns more than him. He stops her from visiting her parents without his permission. Yes, he even accuses her of sleeping with her boss On top of everything, he says a man should take his spouse for granted and asks her to accept him as he is!

The lady tries her best to make the marriage work. To be fair, I felt that she was the mature character who was even trying to be in the marriage – the man was always making the wrong noises and moves, completely taking her for granted. She calls it quits, being the strong, independent woman that she is. Yes, I felt that it was the only sensible decision any person who wants to live would take.

On the train, when she learns that she is face to face with the spouse of her ex, she (as anyone would naturally be expected to do) tries to change her seat, but to no avail. However, the shock is to follow. She meets the present wife (Aparajita Auddy) of her ex and suddenly, over a night’s travel, dwells over her broken marriage, is shown to have had a change of heart and even think that she should have perhaps compromised to save the marriage. Now, the second wife has left her career, looks after her daughter and takes care of the in laws – an apparent embodiment of domestic bliss! Ha! This is where I felt that the movie caved in; I even felt it regressive. Why is a woman shown to have taken an irrational and insensible decision when she walks out of an abusive and insensitive marriage (more so, when one of the directors is a woman!) She even states that she has learned a great lesson from her and the lesson is that one wins life with compromise and that is the secret of happiness. I agree that one has to make compromises in life. But Dipa’s life itself, I felt was a compromise; so where was the issue of her being in the marriage in the first place?

The fact that the movie tries to state that if you stay in the marriage it is good and if you leave it (the woman, in particular)  you are evil - did not work for me. It is almost saying that if a man is in a marriage it is only because the wife is good and if the marriage breaks it is because of the wife. A woman cannot be strong, have opinions, be ambitious but just compromise and make a marriage work. Regressive? Perhaps. Maybe even judgemental and moralizing. There is just one scene where the man apologises to the woman, on the train, after so many years. A movie that was building up very nicely just crashed for me there. The only plus was she did walk the talk, move on and marry another man. If I may, I will take a step further and say that it is anti-woman!

However, there are a lot of lessons to be learnt from the movie, by couples. Relationships transform as couples move from courtship to marriage. You are shocked to see that this person who was so charismatic, someone who everyone seems to like is not the same person in private! There is a dialogue in the movie where the woman says to the man, “You spout Dostoevsky in public but are steeped in superstition in private.” You discover a person who you did not think existed in the first place. In many cases it is not a WYSIWYG - What you see is what you get, to use an age old computer acronym.

The first thing that is required for a marriage to work is spending time with each other. How many times have you prioritized your job, family or friends to your spouse? In the movie, all Dipa wants is her husband’s time. She waits dutifully for the husband to come home and just wants one thing - her man has to prioritise her and give her time. He doesn’t.

The second is respect. One has to respect the person for what they are and don’t try to pick holes for what they aren’t. One has to take pride in each other’s job or body of work.

The third part is making an effort to understand each other. Don’t couples take each other for granted? How many of them go for that small drive, watch a movie together, take in stories about each other’s jobs just as that punching bag, cook together, smile together, look into each others’ eyes and say “I love you”? How many couples make an effort to make a love less marriage into a love filled one? In order for a marriage to work, there has to be an effort from both sides.

In the movie, the male protagonist is shown to have matured and learnt to make efforts to bring peace to his second marriage, which he ever attempted in his first.

People in failed relationships want to end them, which is perhaps the right thing to do – just cut your losses and jump off a sinking ship. I feel that the woman did the right thing in this case – when a marriage that appeared rosy metamorphosises into a difficult proposition later, after making attempts to adjust, giving it a fair chance to succeed, one has to just move on. So, you find that this is not the person whom you were waiting for all your life. It is all about choosing the right timing to move on. But….How sure are we that we gave it a fair chance to succeed? Are we willing to let go of each other amicably if it comes to that? Most importantly do we actually manage to move on in every way possible once the relationship ceases to exist?

However, the movie shows that, in a marriage, perhaps nobody is right and nobody is wrong – it is all about perspective; each feels that he or she is correct, but the ego kills the relationship slowly and steadily. I felt that the movie had immense potential – if only it did not shrink itself to sermonizing the woman!