Adversity doesn’t spare even superheroes. But the dignity with which they overcome setbacks only adds to their aura. And that is what makes Amitabh Bachchan’s longevity and enduring appeal the stuff of legends
It is 8.15 pm and we are ushered into a study on the first floor at Janak, Amitabh Bachchan’s office bungalow in the upscale Juhu suburb of Mumbai. Janak is a couple of houses away from his residence, Jalsa, where, every Sunday, hundreds throng to get a glimpse of the 71-year-old superstar who has straddled Indian cinema like a colossus for nearly half a century.
Even before we meet Bachchan, we are surrounded by his presence captured in Parisian black-and-white photographs and a wall-sized painting, in award statuettes lining the shelves and in a chest of drawers containing books ranging from those by American writer Saul Bellow to Nelson Mandela’s autobiography.
Bachchan, known for his punctuality, is running a little late. However, he ensures we are kept abreast of his schedule and told that he would meet us as soon as he gets in. After a few minutes, the staff at Janak begins to bustle, indicating that he has arrived.
We are taken to the second floor where the door opens to Bachchan standing in the middle of a large room with his hand outstretched waiting to greet us. He is wearing a white Pathan suit with a green-and-yellow Bengal shawl draped around his shoulders. After the pleasantries, he gets to business (“So what is this interview about?” he asks). What follows is an engrossing discussion on the life and times of one of India’s most enduring icons; a discussion peppered with wit, humility and wistfulness in equal measure; quintessentially Amitabh Bachchan.
Q. You are among the longest lasting icons of Indian cinema and the country in general. What does the fame and attention mean to you?
I have never believed in these epithets and I don’t know that I have been in the industry long enough for you to say that I am the ‘longest lasting’. There have been many others before me, many established and more credible people. But, yes, I have been around for 45 years. I came into the industry in 1969. I don’t know… it is a job that I enjoy.
Q. Sure there have been others as you say. But nobody has had this impact. Look at the people outside your house on Sundays.
I think it started off primarily as… I don’t know what to call it. When I was in the hospital after my Coolie accident in 1982, I was quite surprised. I didn’t know what was happening outside but when I came out I found that there was great love and affection. Many people had done penance, prayed, went through personal agony: That was a very moving experience.
Actors know when they get appreciated for their work. They walk on the streets and people recognise their face; some wave out to you, a couple of them ask for your autograph. But this was unique. Thereafter, when I reached home, every evening people would gather outside the gates just to see me, I think try and get some kind of confirmation that I am alive. So I would go out and shake their hands. For some reason, it has become a practice.
Q. Cinema is often looked at as a reflection of the times. In the 1970s, it was about ‘the angry young man’; it reflected the angst of the people. Should cinema be pure entertainment or actually manifest the mood and maybe even offer solutions to the prevailing problems?
I will do a counter to that. If you look at all the films that have been successful at the box office, they have some kind of a moral approach in them. The very concept of Indian cinema or, perhaps, of cinema around the world is the fact of poetic justice in three hours. You don’t get that in a lifetime or even several lifetimes. There is a moral message that crime will be punished, good will prevail over evil, relationships in families are important, the integrity of women… all that is incorporated in our films. And it can be made entertaining as well.
Q. On the subject of the real world, what are your views on philanthropy—about giving back to society?
I think it is personal where everyone wants to do something more. And if they are in that position—that is their own decision. If you are able to improve somebody’s life, provide some help to those who want it, then why not do it?
Q. Do you think it should be spoken about?
I have not spoken about it. There are two approaches, one of which is you silently go ahead and do it—and, for me, that is the right thing to do. Tom-tomming it appears a little arrogant. I am the United Nations (UN) ambassador for polio; I am the UN ambassador for the girl child as well. We have worked on polio for many years and India was finally in a polio-free situation last year, and this year again. We have to do one more year before India can be declared a polio-free country. There is great satisfaction in this. But it puts me in an awkward position to have to describe it in the form of this interview.
Q. In the West, a lot of influential people lend their names to quite a few causes, such as ensuring better governance. Not necessarily activism, but they support it. That doesn’t happen too much here.
Q. You have not looked back since…
Q. Equally, there would also be other newcomers without adequate contacts who wouldn’t know how to go ahead in the world of films. Would you help them by putting them in touch with the right people, for instance?
Q. With you as the common factor…
(This story appears in the 27 December, 2013 issue of Forbes India. To visit our Archives, click here.)