Author's Note

I knew right away that I wanted to create a film adaptation piece for “Management of Grief.” In my first draft, I had not yet come up with the idea to incorporate a love story. My focus was entirely on the comparison between western culture and traditional indian culture. To help the viewer better understand the stark contrast between the cultures, I changed Templeton’s occupation - she became a reporter to convey the clash between the perception of ruthless westerners, versus those who are accustomed to a more modest lifestyle in the East (Shaila and those in the indian community in the suburbs of NYC). After my attempt to highlight culture as a main theme and conflict, I then decided to take a new direction to create another conflict. In the short story, Shaila is very conflicted with herself as well, but the focus is more on the fact that she will not accept the death of her family (due in part because of her culture). In the film, I wanted the conflict to run deeper. I realized that some of the most engaging films in the drama genre (which is my intention for this film) have involved a love story of some sort. This was when I decided to transform Dr. Ranganathan’s character into that of an American journalist living in India. I thought that if viewers could recognize the internal conflict of Shaila in regard to her love for Dr. Ranganathan (Derek Walker, in the movie) they may be more prone to relate to Shaila’s character. While part of Shaila’s conflict resides in the fact that she loves an American man, another part of it involves the betrayal and guilt that she feels because of the emotion itself. I felt that this was a more universal conflict, and by making it a focal point, more viewers can relate (this conflict deals with suppressing feelings, so it can be related to in a number of ways, not necessarily directly after tragedy). 

What I really enjoy about my film adaptation was that I was able to maintain the perception of Shaila as a strong character, but through a different lens. She is not on medication, and she finds herself in constant struggle. I wanted viewers to have more insight into her character as a person, not just a mother, and an Indian women. Hence, I enjoy how this movie both distinguishes between cultures, but at the same time, conveys a larger message that as human beings, we are still linked to one another (we all share a broad nature that makes us distinct from other organisms, one of which being the desire, and vulnerability, for love). One thing I am worried about, though, is how I portray Dr. Ranganathan in the movie - more so my lack of representing his role as it is represented in the short story. In the literature, it is my understanding that his purpose is to provide readers with a male perspective for dealing with grief. Since the majority of the story centers on Shaila, Dr. Ranganathan’s presence helps broaden the readers’ perceptions of how different characters cope with loss. However, in the film it can still be assumed that he conveys internal conflict. He may not be coping with grief, as Shaila is, but he is also conflicted because he believes that, in loving Shaila, he should be strong enough to let her go so that she may fulfill what Vikram and the rest of her family had planned for themselves in America. So he, too, represents a character undergoing internalized conflict, but under a different circumstance (he has not lost his family).

Lastly, I am unsure how well I represented symbolism. I wanted viewers to be able to create their own interpretations in the movie. What the love story represented to me, may not necessarily be in line with others’ interpretations. However, I do believe that the movie presents a clear message that human beings, no matter what culture they are from, or what their life experiences may be, all possess a similar nature that brings them together - that being a need for love.