

Tapan Sinha’s Kabuliwala skewers societal stereotypes and champions a humanity that transcends superficial differences like race, religion, gender and age
Chhabi Biswas and Oindrilla Thakur in Tapan Sinha’s Kabuliwala (Bengali)
Rabindranath Tagore’s Kabuliwala, written in 1892, is the story of fathers and daughters, memories retained and memories lost, a shared sense of loss, and a human connection that transcends class, religion and race. It is a simple, unassuming tale familiar to most Indians – that of Rahmat, a migrant from Afghanistan who hawks dry fruits on the streets of Calcutta, and of his endearing but transient friendship with Mini, the five-year-old daughter of a Bengali middle-class family. Rahmat has had to leave his own little girl behind in Afghanistan, and it is this separation that forms the crux of the story (and the film).
Adapting literature to film is not an easy task. And adapting Tagore’s literature, with its strong connection to the Bengali psyche, is even more fraught. Any deviation from the source is sure to be condemned. So, Tapan Sinha’s cinematic adaptation stays faithful to the original story barring a few extrapolations and changes. Yet, the Kabuliwala we see on screen is vastly different in tone and mood from Tagore’s short story.
Oindrila (Tinku) Thakur as Mini and Radhamohan Bhattacharya as her father
Tagore used Mini’s father as the narrator; the story of Mini’s friendship with the Kabuliwala is told from the father’s perspective. We never learn much about the Kabuliwala, not even his name, until the very end when a short paragraph gives us a glimpse into the man’s psyche. The great litterateur leaves his Kabuliwala to his readers’ imaginations.
In Sinha’s hands, the story becomes the Kabuliwala’s. We are introduced to him as a person, know his name, and see events unfold from his perspective. In so doing, Sinha gives us a deeper look into Rahmat’s inner world.
Warden sees the five-rupee note given by Mini
There is, for instance, the scene in the jail where Rahmat is incarcerated, where a guard refuses his request to look at his belongings. The warden who intervenes, initially tells Rahmat that he cannot handle his belongings daily. But when he sees Rabiya’s handprint and learns about the five-rupee note that Mini gave Rahmat, he is kind enough to give his permission. This scene establishes two things – one is, of course, the jailor’s innate kindness. But it also helps us see Rahmat as a father who yearns for his daughter and for the little girl who has come to represent her. It also establishes his grief at being separated from them.
This subplot, as also the one with the jailor’s daughter, is Sinha’s addition to the original story. It subtly emphasises Rahmat’s fatherhood – his affectionate behaviour towards the jailor’s daughter shows (rather than tells) us what kind of a father he is. These scenes serve to flesh out Tagore’s Kabuliwala (who is only presented to us through the lens of Mini’s father) into a three-dimensional character with feelings and emotions. They allow us to invest in Rahmat’s camaraderie with his compatriots, his homesickness and his longing for his daughter; they make us feel more intensely for his deep sense of grief at the end of the story.
Sinha also made other changes: in the story, Rahmat stabs a customer who refuses to pay for a shawl he bought (and now denies buying). In the film, the victim is Rahmat’s landlord who insists upon being paid an extra month and demands that Rahmat give him the five-rupee note that Mini had given him. This makes the argument more personal.
But the biggest change is at the end: in Tagore’s story, Mini’s father gives Rehmat the money he had kept aside for the lighting at his daughter’s wedding. Sinha makes the mother, who has long dreamt of the lighting and the band at her daughter’s wedding, hand over the money she has saved to her husband to give Rahmat so he can visit his daughter.
These changes take nothing away from the underlying humanity of Tagore’s story. Indeed, the last change, especially, humanises Mini’s mother who, both in the story and the film, is a stand-in for society at large – prejudiced, bigoted, and fearful of people and things she does not understand.
Sinha subtly mirrors situations as well; the father-daughter bond between Rahmat and Rabiya (even if she has very little screen time) is replicated in the bond shared between Mini and her father as well as between Mini and Rahmat.
Similarly, when Rahmat returns from jail, he cannot recognize his little playmate in the young woman standing before him, partly hidden behind her father. Mini, too, has forgotten the kindly man with whom she had spent many a happy moment. Rahmat’s grief is not just that Mini does not recognize him; it is the realisation that his daughter will have grown up as well and that he will be as much a stranger to her as he is to Mini.
Mini gives money to Rahmat
In his telling, Sinha draws attention to the differences and similarities between the two fathers: while tolerant of his daughter’s friendship with the Kabuliwala, Mini’s father had never seen the Afghan as a social equal. This is evident in his discomfort with Rahmat giving Mini unsolicited gifts and in his insistence upon paying for them. But when Rahmat turns back to show him the tattered handprint wrapped around the five-rupee note, Mini’s father finally discovers a shared human connection: that of yearning for a loved one. Rahmat has been separated from his daughter for years. By the film’s end, Mini’s father is about to be separated from his daughter.
Sinha’s deep dive into Tagorean humanism reflects not just in his adaptations of Tagore’s works but in his vast oeuvre spanning four decades or more. Of his Tagore adaptations (the others being Kshudito Pashan, Atithi and Kadambini [a short within Satabdir Kanya]), Kabuliwala still remains relevant in its critical questioning of the stereotyping of an entire race or religion and in its championship of humanity that transcends superficial differences.
So many of its themes find parallels in present times – people still migrate in search of a better life; migrants are still ‘othered’ in towns and cities not their own; people still fear those who do not look like them; prejudices and inbuilt biases still make us fear that which we do not understand…
This is a theme that filmmakers Shombhu Mitra and Amit Mitra had earlier successfully explored in their film Ek Din Ratrey (filmed simultaneously in Hindi as Jagte Raho) in 1956. There, a migrant worker in search of water to quench his thirst is hunted by the residents of the apartment building in which he has sought refuge. The film highlighted middle-class hypocrisy while simultaneously calling out the inherent prejudice that accuses a poor migrant of theft, simply because he’s a stranger.
Balraj Sahni in Bimal Roy’s Kabuliwala (Hindi)
Fellow filmmaker Bimal Roy discussed this ‘othering’ in a gentler way in Sujata (1959), where the foster daughter, who is of a lower caste, is consistently referred to as ‘beti jaisi’. Regardless of the compassion shown by the upper-caste couple in bringing up an orphaned baby, the mother’s in-built prejudices will not allow her to accept the girl wholeheartedly. Roy quietly skewers this bias by showing us that even ‘good’ people harbour innate prejudices that are then cemented by societal endorsement.
Decades have passed since then, but seemingly nothing has changed. Anubhav Sinha’s Bheed (2023) tackles the plight of migrant workers during the 2020 lockdown. While the story is about the largest migration that India has seen since the Partition, the film also showcases how migrant workers are othered in a way that dehumanises their existence.
The more sinister ‘othering’ is the consistent othering of a minority community in films. Muslims in Hindi films have their identities submerged into convenient tropes. The women are veiled, subject to and empathising with regressive practices, with little or no agency (Chaudvin ka Chand, Nikaah, Bewafa se Wafa). The men appear as the token ‘good Muslim’ (Chak De!, Hum Aap ke Hain Kaun), terrorists (Fiza, Mission Kashmir, Kurbaan) or gangsters (Agneepath,). It is this demonisation of an entire religion that Anubhav Sinha explores in his earlier film, Mulk (2018). The narrative is hard-hitting, compelling and on-the-nose. In laying bare societal double standards, the contemporary director pulls no punches.
For Rahmat, Mini is a stand-in for his own daughter
But Tapan Sinha is a more sensitive storyteller, with a penchant for seeking out the intrinsic goodness in his characters. And Tagore’s story exemplifies that search for goodness in people. The titular character is both migrant and Muslim; tall, bearded, clad in a Pathan suit and very different from the dhoti-wearing Bengali bhadralok – he’s to be feared because he’s so different. Yet, Rahmat, the ‘outsider’, bonds with a child as yet free of the social prejudices of adults. For Rahmat, Mini is a stand-in for his own daughter. So, he brings her gifts of nuts and raisins, listens admiringly to her non-stop chatter and makes her laugh with his tall tales.
Mini’s friendship with Rahmat is based on tolerance and acceptance and transcends age, gender, religion and nationality. It reflects Mini’s lack of social conditioning, her mother’s fear and distrust of ‘foreigners’ notwithstanding. Though initially fearing that Rahmat’s jhola contains the children he’s kidnapped, Mini is soon amused by his tales of imaginary elephants inside the bag. Sinha makes Mini symbolic of the innocence and goodness that Tagore champions. In his sensitive handling, the viewer experiences the power of love and compassion in a world fractured by hate and distrust. Through Mini, her father, the warden, etc., Sinha creates a gentler, kinder society that is welcoming towards and accepting of outsiders.
The film’s biggest strength lies in this gentleness – the message of universal brotherhood and unconditional love is woven into the story with so much affection that it’s hard not to be enthralled. Sinha also uses Pandit Ravi Shankar’s music – which won him the Silver Bear Extraordinary Prize at the 7th Berlinale – so naturally that it melds into the narrative.
Kabuliwala ends on a poignant yet ambiguous note. Like Tagore, who wrote “…shesh hoye hoilo na shesh” (loosely translates into “It’s not over”), we are left wondering whether Rahmat will reunite with his daughter. Yet the compassion with which Mini’s family enable a father to unite with his long-separated daughter leaves you with a feeling of hope – and a lump in your throat.
Whether you are new or veteran, you are important. Please contribute with your articles on cinema, we are looking forward for an association. Send your writings to amitava@silhouette-magazine.com
We are editorially independent, not funded, supported or influenced by investors or agencies. We try to keep our content easily readable in an undisturbed interface, not swamped by advertisements and pop-ups. Our mission is to provide a platform you can call your own creative outlet and everyone from renowned authors and critics to budding bloggers, artists, teen writers and kids love to build their own space here and share with the world.
When readers like you contribute, big or small, it goes directly into funding our initiative. Your support helps us to keep striving towards making our content better. And yes, we need to build on this year after year. Support LnC-Silhouette with a little amount – and it only takes a minute. Thank you
Silhouette Magazine publishes articles, reviews, critiques and interviews and other cinema-related works, artworks, photographs and other publishable material contributed by writers and critics as a friendly gesture. The opinions shared by the writers and critics are their personal opinion and does not reflect the opinion of Silhouette Magazine. Images on Silhouette Magazine are posted for the sole purpose of academic interest and to illuminate the text. The images and screen shots are the copyright of their original owners. Silhouette Magazine strives to provide attribution wherever possible. Images used in the posts have been procured from the contributors themselves, public forums, social networking sites, publicity releases, YouTube, Pixabay and Creative Commons. Please inform us if any of the images used here are copyrighted, we will pull those images down.
Wow! Anuradha, I have been a follower of your blog for a while and read (enjoyed) many of your essays. Dare I say, this is among your best?
I have read this twice and am likely to read it yet again. This concept of ‘othering’ – how well you describe it in many of its hues and with choice examples too! That mention of ‘Mulk’ – a film as brutal as they come – positioned against the gentleness in this film – just brilliant, my dear! And you don’t forget to compare the original story with the film either!
Wishing your pen never runs dry, Anuradha! You’ve given me so much to mull over. Fabulously crafted essay, skillfully edited! You brought both Tagore and Tapan Sinha alive for me. Thank you so much! _()_
This response humbles me. Thank you, Monica, not only for reading and commenting on this essay but also letting me know that you read my blog.
This is the highest compliment anyone could ever pay me! Thank you, thank you, thank you!
What a fabulous piece of writing this is, Anu. I echo Monica Kar in saying “may your pen never run dry”.
BTW, another compliment I must pass on to you, though it came by mistake to me. I was at a wedding and someone, when introduced to me, said, “Oh, I love your blog, Conversations Over Chai! It’s so rare to see someone write with so much literary flare on Bollywood – otherwise most Bollywood blogs are really rather trashy.”
I had to gently inform her that I didn’t write Conversations Over Chai. 😉
Thank you, Madhu. It means much, coming from you.
I laughed when I read your comment about my blog; I know our writing is pretty similar, but this is a new one. Not comparing us to these luminaries, of course, but it reminded me of the time someone approached Gulzar, praised his poetry, and wanted his autograph – all of which he gladly gave until the woman thanked him at the end: “Thank you, Javed saab.” So, if it can happen to them, hum kya cheez hain? 🙂