The requirement for moving muscle in present day Tamil films is reserved only for dancing and fight sequences. Of course, I am being very generalistic here. But consider the achievements present day actors reap, which mainly consist of the ability to move their facial muscle. The film Valee, for example, was celebrated for its lead's (Ajith Kumar) performance. For me, it is mainly a revelation that the present generation of performers are indeed capable of a facial expression or two.

All that bashings aside, this article intents to penetrate into the phsyche of the actor Sivaji Ganesan. I would avoid the use of titles like Chevalier, or Nadigar Thilagam, since the mere mention of the name Sivaji is enough to bring thousands of screen images to the minds of Tamil film fans, which is far more important than said titles. Historical figures like W.U. Chithambaram (Kappalotiya Tamizhan) and Kattabomman (Veerapandiya Kattabomman), religious identities like Lord Shiva (Tiruvilayadal) and Appar (Thiruvarutchelvar), all the nine roles in one film (Navarathiri) and many others are up there, representing his achievements. There are so many, so varied, but the truth is simple. Sivaji means great screen performance. Why do I say so? And why I still hear some protest.

I am most careful when I mention "the best actor in Tamil film". Though it would be Sivaji in my book, I can't decide for anyone else who it was, or will ever be. Fans are torn between the realistic portrayal of Kamal and his peers, and Sivaji and performers at the time of his peak. There are those who dismiss the stage-like exaggerated performance so abundant in Tamil cinema before the eighties, while there are just as many (probably more) who revere it. The latter will appreciate Sivaji (unless they are still two bickering blocks, another being the backers of MGR), while the former are quite in unity (some grudgingly so) in admitting about Kamal Hassan's superior performance.

There used to be a time when Sivaji's name was associated with overacting. Here was his reaction to it:

"What is acting? It means doing something that is not natural. So then where is the question of overacting? When your mother dies, what do you do? You shout Amma and cry, don't you? Your instant reaction is to cry out loud. Not sit quietly covering your eyes with your hands. That's exactly what I do in my films."

Justification or not, one must admit that Sivaji had in more occasions immersed himself in the role. This is not something to shout about. Its the most basic requirements at the core of performing art. Stanislavsky's Method acting is famed for its more extreme bent on character immersion. For the benefit of those who doesn't know this, method acting was popularised by Marlon Brando (see Film Personalities)in the fifties; which requires, amongst others, to recall the actor's memory of certain emotion during the scene. It can be very painful, especially if the memory does not permit happiness. Whether or not Sivaji had even heard of Stanislavsky's method acting (Sowkar Janaki, to my surprise, does; she mentioned it in one interview), the performance he had brought out throughout his career exuded such possibility. He rarely looked fake, though I may add that the rest of him i.e the costume, the wig and the make-up did.

"I was inspired by the character of Kattabomman when I used to watch the theru koothus (street dramas) as a child," he said once. "I had memorised all the dialogues. But that role is not my favourite. I like all my roles, because I do full justice to every one . All good artistes will tell you the same thing. If someone has his roots in theatre, he will definitely tell you that all his roles are the same." That might give one an idea as how much of commitment he gives to all his roles. That, I believe, is the strongest attribute one can give to a true professional. Consistent commitment and discipline.

Which brings us to one characteristics that I found the industry has generally agreed upon - his discipline, especially punctuality. This was what Rajinikanth learnt during his early days from his favourite actor, most likely on the set of "Nan Vazhavaippen", which is a Sivaji film with Rajini having a guest role. Recalls V K Ramaswamy, a versatile comedian and character actor, in one of his interviews:

"One day, I came to the set at 2300 hrs. Sivaji told me, 'You've taken your money from the producer, haven't you? Then why are you late?' I told him that my callsheet was for 2300 hrs. 'That may be,'  Sivaji said, 'but how can you act like that? How can you not be on the set when the film you are working in is being shot? I have done some scenes this evening, now you have to react to those, you have to do the reaction shots. How can you do that well if you don't know how I did my shots?' I learnt a lesson that day.

This statement is another revelation about Sivaji's working method. Here is something else he mentioned to his co-star Nagesh:

Nagesh revealed something else:

He told me, My boy, there are lakhs of people like you out there. If you thought that take could have been improved, lakhs of others might think so too -- only, by then, it would have been too late. So for me, it makes sense to go with your gut feeling, to do another take.

There you go. He listens. That, at times, have been the problem. In the hands of the inferior director and writing, his character suffers and has to mainly survive with Sivaji's on-screen presence. He shines in the hands of masters like Sridhar, K.S. Gopalakrishnan, Bhim Singh, Banthulu and A P Nagarajan. The ever-inconsistent Barathiraja had a go in using Sivaji and managed to pull it off beautifully in Muthal Mariyadhai. Kamal once declared that his favourite Sivaji performance was in his own film, Thevar Magan, where the latter's powerful screen presence did most of the acting. This usually happens especially with the older Hollywood actors like Brando and Paul Newman in present day films. But he failed again in the latter day films like Once More and Mannavar Chinnavar, his final film, co-starring Arjun. The directors simply didn't know how to use him. They probably felt intimidated and decided to let Sivaji on his own. There lies the faliure.

"Sivaji was very convincing and realistic in his earlier films -- in the Fifties and the early Sixties," said Theodore Baskaran, a film historian to Rediff.com. "But he became a stylised and flamboyant actor during his stardom days. In the Nineties, he went back to the subtle, controlled style of acting."

Baskaran mentioned that during Sivaji's stardom, he didn't have directors controlling him, hence Sivaji's excessive reliance on his stage experience and heeding demands of some fans for flamboyance. This flamboyance was adopted by many actors following him, but only one succeeded into making it watchable - Rajini.

To me, if at all there was one actor who devoured Sivaji's acting method in its entirety, it would be Rajinikanth. Rajini owes all of it to Sivaji. While Kamal also adopted, apart from Sivaji, methods from outside India, especially those of Marlon Brando and Charlie Chaplin; Rajini and Sathyaraj used Sivaji as THE encyclopaedia for acting. They never denied it.

Rajini especially remarked that "If I am the king of style, Sivaji is the emperor of style." The style he was referring to is immediately recognised by Tamil film fans as gimmicks such as popping cigarettes (and of late, cigars) into his mouth. There are more. Forget about style, his performance is very Sivaji-like during the early days. His father character in Netrikann has many traits of Sivaji's Inspector Choudary from Tanggapathakkam; the physical stiffness, the speed of the delivery of the dialogue and the outburst. Rajini's other famous character Alex Pandiyan is almost a tribute to Inspector Choudary.

The same can be said of Sathyaraj. Watch his lawyer in Villathi Villain and you need no effort to recall Sivaji's performance (my favourite) as an egostical lawyer in Gouravam.

Says Satyaraj in one interview, "When you think about it, what we know of historical characters is what Sivaji Ganesan showed us. Whether it is Subramanya Bharati or Rajaraja Cholan or Kappal Ottiya Thamizhan, Chidambaram Pillai or Veera Pandiya Kattabomman, when we think of them we see what Sivaji showed us. He defined those characters for us. He showed us how they must have walked and how they talked." Though the comment can easily be ignored as comments of another Sivaji worshipper, one must remember Satyaraj's stature as one of the leading men of Tamil cinema. He had his share of good roles, and his statements bear a testimony on strong reliance on his own memory of roles commanded by Sivaji.

Rajini and Sathyaraj are two of the most visible among Sivaji followers. I would like to limit my imagination to them. They are better actors, and worth analysises. I wouldn't want to waste my time and thought on others. True, Sivaji's son Prabhu is a watered down version of his father; but he has a long way to go and is still struggling to establish his own identity. The present day actors are indirectly indebted to Sivaji as they follow the followers of the eminent actor. I may be wrong and I stand to be corrected, but this remains my conviction.

There are much more to write, but more research had to be done, especially his connection, if any, with Hollywood. But I leave you here with one finaly quote from Sivaji himself. Just to show how he was towards his final days, when he was asked about his plans: