A Passage to India: Differences Between E.M. Forster's and David Lean's Outlook

E.M. Forster's celebrated book, 'A Passage to India' and it's much revered silver screen adaptation by David Lean bears canny resemblance in their plot, yet the methods of storytelling and intentions are vastly different. Forster loved India and always stood against the oppressive British regime which denied the Indians a share of their own history and privileges. David Lean's movie, on the other hand, is pro-British and the court-trial that serves as the cornerstone of both the book and the movie, has been presented not so as farcical and actually quite in reverence of British judicial system in it as opposed to what's the book supposedly points to. E.M.Forster was always hesitant, even reluctant to share his book's storyplay with a movie director precisely for this very much possible 'deviation' and it was indeed David Lean's enviable reputation and his persuasion that led Forster to give his nod. And yet it happened. In spite of this genuine deviation and purported British superiority, what definitely makes me glad in Lean's movie was its carefully picked star cast that makes the room for an actual Indian, born, brought up and residing in India, in Victor Banerjee to rise and shine. He is simply 'believable' as a lawyer who is wrongfully convicted in a false trial. Sir Alec Guinnes is also there in the role of a learned brahmin and you couldn't identify it if I hadn't given you a clue here.

All in all, 'A Passage to India', the last glorified addition to Lean's unrivalled repertoire as a movie director, does justice to Forster's book for 80% of the time. What it doesn't manage to do in 20% department is what leads us to like and adore the books more.