Features
Tony Ranasinghe ,in full flow
By Uditha Devapriya
This is the first in a series of candid vignettes about Tony Ranasinghe, one of the most complex actors we ever had. It is based on an interview the writer did with him in 2014.Marlon Brando strode the theatre like the colossus that he was, changing the face of acting in a way none of his predecessors had. Yet, even after the shock of seeing him in A Streetcar Named Desire, nothing quite prepared people for his role as Mark Antony in Julius Caesar. For me, this is the ultimate Brando performance; it is so, simply because, in a cast filled with the most distinguished thespians of the day – from John Gielgud to James Mason – Brando stands apart, the obvious exception, the odd man out, the black sheep. When Antony weeps over Caesar’s body, he doesn’t wax eloquent, he mumbles.
The performance startled audiences, shocked others, and scandalised a few. In Sri Lanka, a new generation of actors had begun to crop up – they had left school and had moved to Colombo, in search of employment – and they came across Brando. Most of them took to him, entranced by his interpretation of a character which had, for so long, been deemed sacrosanct by thespians, and stage directors. “When you see Gielgud and Mason, and Brando enters the story, things never seem the same,” Cyril Wickramage told me. “I can’t think of another actor who so enthralled me,” Ravindra Randeniya, who went on to play Stanley in Dhamma Jagoda’s adaptation of A Streetcar Named Desire, recalled.
There’s probably no better and more fitting symbol of Brando’s influence on acting in Sri Lanka than Gamini Fonseka. The carelessness, the disregard for the other characters, the sleek agility, and the tendency to project himself, rather than the character he is playing – these are hallmarks of a Brando performance, and they are there in Fonseka’s performances, too. “I chose him because he was the ideal fit for Simon Kabilana,” Lester Peries told me, talking about Yuganthaya. I saw his point: at that point, Fonseka was the only man in the country who could play Kabilana. He had progressed from the naivete of his early years – captured by Peries himself, in Gamperaliya – into a kind of supreme self-confidence, which Brando had, by that time, epitomised. To see Fonseka was to savour him.
When I met him, in 2014, Tony Ranasinghe was not doing well. He did not want to meet me at first: he was doubtful about whether we’d have a fruitful conversation. Having read one gossipy piece after another in the papers, I couldn’t blame him. And yet, I wanted to have a serious conversation with him, about what he thought of his profession. After drinking his medicine, he rambled on and on. I sensed that he preferred me gone. Just three years out of school, with no aim in life other than meeting those who had contributed to our cultural landscapes, I was probably an outsider in his eyes. But, as the minutes wore on, he began to relax. Something in him softened. We began to have that serious conversation.
Much to my surprise, Ranasinghe did not think highly of Brando. He preferred to talk about Shakespeare – he had translated Shakespeare to Sinhala, one of the first in his time to do so – and about Kurosawa’s Ran, which he rated as among the finest adaptations of his plays. Perhaps, inevitably, we got around to Brando’s Mark Antony. The lines under Ranasinghe’s eyes darkened somewhat. “That is not a performance I rate highly,” he told me. I thought of telling him how eloquently Cyril Wickramage had waxed on it, but soon thought otherwise. I was, after all, sitting in front of one of Sri Lanka’s finest actors, and if he didn’t like Brando’s acting, who was I to disagree? “He doesn’t act, he mumbles, contrary to how a Shakespeare performance should be played out,” he told me.
He then moved on to Brando’s later work. “Five or so years after Julius Caesar, he took part in a film called The Ugly American. To me, that signified Brando’s failures as an actor.” The Ugly American is not one of Brando’s finest performances – the acting is jittery. Yet, to take such a role, and ignore his other credits – such as the widowed husband in Last Tango in Paris or the Don in The Godfather, seemed unfair. “In his later years, he unbuckled himself so badly that he lost all sense of discipline.” He was referring to Brando’s lesser years – his unjustifiably expensive cameo in Superman, and his even more unjustifiably unfocused role in The Island of Dr Moreau. But what of the interregnum, his great years? To Ranasinghe, these seemed dispensable, quirks in a jittery career. In a big way his attitude reflected his own notions of acting, which stemmed from his career and work.
Not unlike most of his contemporaries, Tony Ranasinghe came from a theatrical tradition. At De La Salle College, in Modera, he had involved himself in literary activities. At S. Thomas’, Gamini Fonseka had done the same. But for Ranasinghe, these activities instilled in him a love for the literary and the dramatic. The rift between theatre and cinema, particularly in acting, is too discernible to ignore. In that sense Ranasinghe emerged as a counterpoint to Fonseka. Ever respectful of the stage, he never quite left it. In Sugathapala Silva’s group, Ape Kattiya, he found not so much a vocation as a refuge from the dreariness of a day job. And with the plays he took part in there – like Boarding Karayo – he discovered his niche, as the bewildered everyman. This was to be his niche in the movies, too.
Lester Peries’s film of Gamperaliya focuses on the relationship between Nanda, Piyal, and Jinadasa. As such, it never gives the attention they deserve to the side characters. These characters were played by the Ape Kattiya troupe. Ranasinghe got the role of Baladasa, acting beside Wickrema Bogoda, Anula Karunatilake, and G. W. Surendra, all of whom had been trained and tutored by Sugathapala de Silva. Peries opted for these actors in his later work, epitomised unforgettably by his pairing of Bogoda and Karunatilake in the greatest love story adapted here, Golu Hadawatha. What he did for Bogoda and Karunatilake there, he did for Ranasinghe in his second film after Gamperaliya, Delovak Athara.
Towards the end of Delovak Athara, Ranasinghe sheds a tear. He is at his wit’s end: he has just told his mother and father that he will not let their servant-boy take the fall for his crime. Caught between two worlds – literally, the title of the film – he finds himself lost in this world, and in his thoughts. Then Willie Blake’s camera “frames him between two tree trunks, and catches the slow trickle of a tear down his cheek.” In The Lonely Artist, Philip Cooray contends that the scene lacks emotional depth: he argues that “the objectivity is all”, and that we “admire and appreciate, from afar.” In other words, Ranasinghe both moves us towards empathy for his plight and cuts us off from him.
If it didn’t do anything else, Delovak Athara revealed Ranasinghe as a leading man, but one capable of great emotional intensity. Contrary to what one Indian critic wrote on him, that he differed from the namby-pamby naivete of Indian actors, Ranasinghe did epitomise that kind of performance. Peries admittedly muted the emotional cadences of his character in Delovak Athara, but this did not, and could not, mute the actor’s intensity. There are scenes and sequences of great, raw emotional power in that film – such as when he confronts his girlfriend and confesses his crime to her – where you see nothing but desperation in his eyes. In Getawarayo, Gamini Fonseka typifies this same desperation, but it’s Ranasinghe who embodies it in a way that makes you really feel for him.
It’s hard to put a finger on such performances. Ranasinghe may have disagreed, but there is in his role as Nissanka, in Delovak Athara, a tinge of the early Brando and the early James Dean. Swineetha Weerasinghe once compared him to Gregory Peck, which is correct if you consider Peck’s patrician airs. But Ranasinghe lacks Peck’s seriousness, the humourless and emotionless appeal of Peck’s characters. The more comparable actors to his characters are James Dean and Marlon Brando. Except that where Dean and Brando tend to give way to their frenzies and emotional histrionics, Ranasinghe tones down, and goes in search of an emotional centre. In Delovak Athara he finds this centre in Weerasinghe’s character, Chitra; in Parasathumal, he finds it in Punya Heendeniya’s character.
The actor most comparable to Ranasinghe’s performances at this point was Montgomery Clift. Deeply sensitive and highly vulnerable, Montgomery’s characters symbolised a new, frustrated American youth, the sort that Dean and Brando would take even further. They are comparable to Ranasinghe’s characters, because, like the latter, they both cry out and tone down. In From Here to Eternity and A Place in the Sun, Clift grits his teeth, less out of anger than out of a frustrated sense of self-worth. He is angry not at what the world is doing to him, but at his inability to respond to the world.
In Delovak Athara Ranasinghe finds himself dominated by three women: his mother, his fiancée, and his friend Chitra. This is the type of situation Clift found his forte in, the type that distinguished Ranasinghe’s characters from Brando’s: whereas the latter couldn’t have bothered less about his predicament, Ranasinghe couldn’t have bothered more about his. In the end, that’s what made his performance in Peries’s film so evocative: not because he was sensitive, but because he cared, and got us to care about him.
(The writer is an international relations analyst, researcher, and columnist who can be reached at udakdev1@gmail.com)
Features
The heart-friendly health minister
by Dr Gotabhya Ranasinghe
Senior Consultant Cardiologist
National Hospital Sri Lanka
When we sought a meeting with Hon Dr. Ramesh Pathirana, Minister of Health, he graciously cleared his busy schedule to accommodate us. Renowned for his attentive listening and deep understanding, Minister Pathirana is dedicated to advancing the health sector. His openness and transparency exemplify the qualities of an exemplary politician and minister.
Dr. Palitha Mahipala, the current Health Secretary, demonstrates both commendable enthusiasm and unwavering support. This combination of attributes makes him a highly compatible colleague for the esteemed Minister of Health.
Our discussion centered on a project that has been in the works for the past 30 years, one that no other minister had managed to advance.
Minister Pathirana, however, recognized the project’s significance and its potential to revolutionize care for heart patients.
The project involves the construction of a state-of-the-art facility at the premises of the National Hospital Colombo. The project’s location within the premises of the National Hospital underscores its importance and relevance to the healthcare infrastructure of the nation.
This facility will include a cardiology building and a tertiary care center, equipped with the latest technology to handle and treat all types of heart-related conditions and surgeries.
Securing funding was a major milestone for this initiative. Minister Pathirana successfully obtained approval for a $40 billion loan from the Asian Development Bank. With the funding in place, the foundation stone is scheduled to be laid in September this year, and construction will begin in January 2025.
This project guarantees a consistent and uninterrupted supply of stents and related medications for heart patients. As a result, patients will have timely access to essential medical supplies during their treatment and recovery. By securing these critical resources, the project aims to enhance patient outcomes, minimize treatment delays, and maintain the highest standards of cardiac care.
Upon its fruition, this monumental building will serve as a beacon of hope and healing, symbolizing the unwavering dedication to improving patient outcomes and fostering a healthier society.We anticipate a future marked by significant progress and positive outcomes in Sri Lanka’s cardiovascular treatment landscape within the foreseeable timeframe.
Features
A LOVING TRIBUTE TO JESUIT FR. ALOYSIUS PIERIS ON HIS 90th BIRTHDAY
by Fr. Emmanuel Fernando, OMI
Jesuit Fr. Aloysius Pieris (affectionately called Fr. Aloy) celebrated his 90th birthday on April 9, 2024 and I, as the editor of our Oblate Journal, THE MISSIONARY OBLATE had gone to press by that time. Immediately I decided to publish an article, appreciating the untiring selfless services he continues to offer for inter-Faith dialogue, the renewal of the Catholic Church, his concern for the poor and the suffering Sri Lankan masses and to me, the present writer.
It was in 1988, when I was appointed Director of the Oblate Scholastics at Ampitiya by the then Oblate Provincial Fr. Anselm Silva, that I came to know Fr. Aloy more closely. Knowing well his expertise in matters spiritual, theological, Indological and pastoral, and with the collaborative spirit of my companion-formators, our Oblate Scholastics were sent to Tulana, the Research and Encounter Centre, Kelaniya, of which he is the Founder-Director, for ‘exposure-programmes’ on matters spiritual, biblical, theological and pastoral. Some of these dimensions according to my view and that of my companion-formators, were not available at the National Seminary, Ampitiya.
Ever since that time, our Oblate formators/ accompaniers at the Oblate Scholasticate, Ampitiya , have continued to send our Oblate Scholastics to Tulana Centre for deepening their insights and convictions regarding matters needed to serve the people in today’s context. Fr. Aloy also had tried very enthusiastically with the Oblate team headed by Frs. Oswald Firth and Clement Waidyasekara to begin a Theologate, directed by the Religious Congregations in Sri Lanka, for the contextual formation/ accompaniment of their members. It should very well be a desired goal of the Leaders / Provincials of the Religious Congregations.
Besides being a formator/accompanier at the Oblate Scholasticate, I was entrusted also with the task of editing and publishing our Oblate journal, ‘The Missionary Oblate’. To maintain the quality of the journal I continue to depend on Fr. Aloy for his thought-provoking and stimulating articles on Biblical Spirituality, Biblical Theology and Ecclesiology. I am very grateful to him for his generous assistance. Of late, his writings on renewal of the Church, initiated by Pope St. John XX111 and continued by Pope Francis through the Synodal path, published in our Oblate journal, enable our readers to focus their attention also on the needed renewal in the Catholic Church in Sri Lanka. Fr. Aloy appreciated very much the Synodal path adopted by the Jesuit Pope Francis for the renewal of the Church, rooted very much on prayerful discernment. In my Religious and presbyteral life, Fr.Aloy continues to be my spiritual animator / guide and ongoing formator / acccompanier.
Fr. Aloysius Pieris, BA Hons (Lond), LPh (SHC, India), STL (PFT, Naples), PhD (SLU/VC), ThD (Tilburg), D.Ltt (KU), has been one of the eminent Asian theologians well recognized internationally and one who has lectured and held visiting chairs in many universities both in the West and in the East. Many members of Religious Congregations from Asian countries have benefited from his lectures and guidance in the East Asian Pastoral Institute (EAPI) in Manila, Philippines. He had been a Theologian consulted by the Federation of Asian Bishops’ Conferences for many years. During his professorship at the Gregorian University in Rome, he was called to be a member of a special group of advisers on other religions consulted by Pope Paul VI.
Fr. Aloy is the author of more than 30 books and well over 500 Research Papers. Some of his books and articles have been translated and published in several countries. Among those books, one can find the following: 1) The Genesis of an Asian Theology of Liberation (An Autobiographical Excursus on the Art of Theologising in Asia, 2) An Asian Theology of Liberation, 3) Providential Timeliness of Vatican 11 (a long-overdue halt to a scandalous millennium, 4) Give Vatican 11 a chance, 5) Leadership in the Church, 6) Relishing our faith in working for justice (Themes for study and discussion), 7) A Message meant mainly, not exclusively for Jesuits (Background information necessary for helping Francis renew the Church), 8) Lent in Lanka (Reflections and Resolutions, 9) Love meets wisdom (A Christian Experience of Buddhism, 10) Fire and Water 11) God’s Reign for God’s poor, 12) Our Unhiddden Agenda (How we Jesuits work, pray and form our men). He is also the Editor of two journals, Vagdevi, Journal of Religious Reflection and Dialogue, New Series.
Fr. Aloy has a BA in Pali and Sanskrit from the University of London and a Ph.D in Buddhist Philosophy from the University of Sri Lankan, Vidyodaya Campus. On Nov. 23, 2019, he was awarded the prestigious honorary Doctorate of Literature (D.Litt) by the Chancellor of the University of Kelaniya, the Most Venerable Welamitiyawe Dharmakirthi Sri Kusala Dhamma Thera.
Fr. Aloy continues to be a promoter of Gospel values and virtues. Justice as a constitutive dimension of love and social concern for the downtrodden masses are very much noted in his life and work. He had very much appreciated the commitment of the late Fr. Joseph (Joe) Fernando, the National Director of the Social and Economic Centre (SEDEC) for the poor.
In Sri Lanka, a few religious Congregations – the Good Shepherd Sisters, the Christian Brothers, the Marist Brothers and the Oblates – have invited him to animate their members especially during their Provincial Congresses, Chapters and International Conferences. The mainline Christian Churches also have sought his advice and followed his seminars. I, for one, regret very much, that the Sri Lankan authorities of the Catholic Church –today’s Hierarchy—- have not sought Fr.
Aloy’s expertise for the renewal of the Catholic Church in Sri Lanka and thus have not benefited from the immense store of wisdom and insight that he can offer to our local Church while the Sri Lankan bishops who governed the Catholic church in the immediate aftermath of the Second Vatican Council (Edmund Fernando OMI, Anthony de Saram, Leo Nanayakkara OSB, Frank Marcus Fernando, Paul Perera,) visited him and consulted him on many matters. Among the Tamil Bishops, Bishop Rayappu Joseph was keeping close contact with him and Bishop J. Deogupillai hosted him and his team visiting him after the horrible Black July massacre of Tamils.
Features
A fairy tale, success or debacle
Sri Lanka-Singapore Free Trade Agreement
By Gomi Senadhira
senadhiragomi@gmail.com
“You might tell fairy tales, but the progress of a country cannot be achieved through such narratives. A country cannot be developed by making false promises. The country moved backward because of the electoral promises made by political parties throughout time. We have witnessed that the ultimate result of this is the country becoming bankrupt. Unfortunately, many segments of the population have not come to realize this yet.” – President Ranil Wickremesinghe, 2024 Budget speech
Any Sri Lankan would agree with the above words of President Wickremesinghe on the false promises our politicians and officials make and the fairy tales they narrate which bankrupted this country. So, to understand this, let’s look at one such fairy tale with lots of false promises; Ranil Wickremesinghe’s greatest achievement in the area of international trade and investment promotion during the Yahapalana period, Sri Lanka-Singapore Free Trade Agreement (SLSFTA).
It is appropriate and timely to do it now as Finance Minister Wickremesinghe has just presented to parliament a bill on the National Policy on Economic Transformation which includes the establishment of an Office for International Trade and the Sri Lanka Institute of Economics and International Trade.
Was SLSFTA a “Cleverly negotiated Free Trade Agreement” as stated by the (former) Minister of Development Strategies and International Trade Malik Samarawickrama during the Parliamentary Debate on the SLSFTA in July 2018, or a colossal blunder covered up with lies, false promises, and fairy tales? After SLSFTA was signed there were a number of fairy tales published on this agreement by the Ministry of Development Strategies and International, Institute of Policy Studies, and others.
However, for this article, I would like to limit my comments to the speech by Minister Samarawickrama during the Parliamentary Debate, and the two most important areas in the agreement which were covered up with lies, fairy tales, and false promises, namely: revenue loss for Sri Lanka and Investment from Singapore. On the other important area, “Waste products dumping” I do not want to comment here as I have written extensively on the issue.
1. The revenue loss
During the Parliamentary Debate in July 2018, Minister Samarawickrama stated “…. let me reiterate that this FTA with Singapore has been very cleverly negotiated by us…. The liberalisation programme under this FTA has been carefully designed to have the least impact on domestic industry and revenue collection. We have included all revenue sensitive items in the negative list of items which will not be subject to removal of tariff. Therefore, 97.8% revenue from Customs duty is protected. Our tariff liberalisation will take place over a period of 12-15 years! In fact, the revenue earned through tariffs on goods imported from Singapore last year was Rs. 35 billion.
The revenue loss for over the next 15 years due to the FTA is only Rs. 733 million– which when annualised, on average, is just Rs. 51 million. That is just 0.14% per year! So anyone who claims the Singapore FTA causes revenue loss to the Government cannot do basic arithmetic! Mr. Speaker, in conclusion, I call on my fellow members of this House – don’t mislead the public with baseless criticism that is not grounded in facts. Don’t look at petty politics and use these issues for your own political survival.”
I was surprised to read the minister’s speech because an article published in January 2018 in “The Straits Times“, based on information released by the Singaporean Negotiators stated, “…. With the FTA, tariff savings for Singapore exports are estimated to hit $10 million annually“.
As the annual tariff savings (that is the revenue loss for Sri Lanka) calculated by the Singaporean Negotiators, Singaporean $ 10 million (Sri Lankan rupees 1,200 million in 2018) was way above the rupees’ 733 million revenue loss for 15 years estimated by the Sri Lankan negotiators, it was clear to any observer that one of the parties to the agreement had not done the basic arithmetic!
Six years later, according to a report published by “The Morning” newspaper, speaking at the Committee on Public Finance (COPF) on 7th May 2024, Mr Samarawickrama’s chief trade negotiator K.J. Weerasinghehad had admitted “…. that forecasted revenue loss for the Government of Sri Lanka through the Singapore FTA is Rs. 450 million in 2023 and Rs. 1.3 billion in 2024.”
If these numbers are correct, as tariff liberalisation under the SLSFTA has just started, we will pass Rs 2 billion very soon. Then, the question is how Sri Lanka’s trade negotiators made such a colossal blunder. Didn’t they do their basic arithmetic? If they didn’t know how to do basic arithmetic they should have at least done their basic readings. For example, the headline of the article published in The Straits Times in January 2018 was “Singapore, Sri Lanka sign FTA, annual savings of $10m expected”.
Anyway, as Sri Lanka’s chief negotiator reiterated at the COPF meeting that “…. since 99% of the tariffs in Singapore have zero rates of duty, Sri Lanka has agreed on 80% tariff liberalisation over a period of 15 years while expecting Singapore investments to address the imbalance in trade,” let’s turn towards investment.
Investment from Singapore
In July 2018, speaking during the Parliamentary Debate on the FTA this is what Minister Malik Samarawickrama stated on investment from Singapore, “Already, thanks to this FTA, in just the past two-and-a-half months since the agreement came into effect we have received a proposal from Singapore for investment amounting to $ 14.8 billion in an oil refinery for export of petroleum products. In addition, we have proposals for a steel manufacturing plant for exports ($ 1 billion investment), flour milling plant ($ 50 million), sugar refinery ($ 200 million). This adds up to more than $ 16.05 billion in the pipeline on these projects alone.
And all of these projects will create thousands of more jobs for our people. In principle approval has already been granted by the BOI and the investors are awaiting the release of land the environmental approvals to commence the project.
I request the Opposition and those with vested interests to change their narrow-minded thinking and join us to develop our country. We must always look at what is best for the whole community, not just the few who may oppose. We owe it to our people to courageously take decisions that will change their lives for the better.”
According to the media report I quoted earlier, speaking at the Committee on Public Finance (COPF) Chief Negotiator Weerasinghe has admitted that Sri Lanka was not happy with overall Singapore investments that have come in the past few years in return for the trade liberalisation under the Singapore-Sri Lanka Free Trade Agreement. He has added that between 2021 and 2023 the total investment from Singapore had been around $162 million!
What happened to those projects worth $16 billion negotiated, thanks to the SLSFTA, in just the two-and-a-half months after the agreement came into effect and approved by the BOI? I do not know about the steel manufacturing plant for exports ($ 1 billion investment), flour milling plant ($ 50 million) and sugar refinery ($ 200 million).
However, story of the multibillion-dollar investment in the Petroleum Refinery unfolded in a manner that would qualify it as the best fairy tale with false promises presented by our politicians and the officials, prior to 2019 elections.
Though many Sri Lankans got to know, through the media which repeatedly highlighted a plethora of issues surrounding the project and the questionable credentials of the Singaporean investor, the construction work on the Mirrijiwela Oil Refinery along with the cement factory began on the24th of March 2019 with a bang and Minister Ranil Wickremesinghe and his ministers along with the foreign and local dignitaries laid the foundation stones.
That was few months before the 2019 Presidential elections. Inaugurating the construction work Prime Minister Ranil Wickremesinghe said the projects will create thousands of job opportunities in the area and surrounding districts.
The oil refinery, which was to be built over 200 acres of land, with the capacity to refine 200,000 barrels of crude oil per day, was to generate US$7 billion of exports and create 1,500 direct and 3,000 indirect jobs. The construction of the refinery was to be completed in 44 months. Four years later, in August 2023 the Cabinet of Ministers approved the proposal presented by President Ranil Wickremesinghe to cancel the agreement with the investors of the refinery as the project has not been implemented! Can they explain to the country how much money was wasted to produce that fairy tale?
It is obvious that the President, ministers, and officials had made huge blunders and had deliberately misled the public and the parliament on the revenue loss and potential investment from SLSFTA with fairy tales and false promises.
As the president himself said, a country cannot be developed by making false promises or with fairy tales and these false promises and fairy tales had bankrupted the country. “Unfortunately, many segments of the population have not come to realize this yet”.
(The writer, a specialist and an activist on trade and development issues . )