Isn't every role a character? Vijayaraghavan on the confusion in award categories

Veteran Malayalam actor Vijayaraghavan has said he does not wish to be drawn into any controversy regarding the National Film Awards, even as conversations continue around how performances are judged and recognised. The actor, who won the Best Supporting Actor award for his role in 'Pookkaalam', spoke to Manorama News about the broader issues he sees in how award categories are defined and decided.

“This is the first National Award of my 43-year-long film career,” Vijayaraghavan said. “I’m not someone who looks at the size or scale of recognition. I’m grateful, but my concern lies not with the award I received, but with how awards in general are decided.”

Referring to comparisons with Shah Rukh Khan — who won Best Actor at the National Awards — Vijayaraghavan said, “The character I portrayed was my character. The one Shah Rukh Khan portrayed was his. It’s up to the jury to decide which one was better.”

He also pointed to the inconsistency in how actors are categorised. “Last year, I won the Kerala State Award for Best Character Actor. But what does that even mean? Every actor plays a character. Mohanlal, when he acts, is portraying someone else’s life, someone with a name and story. Acting is about breathing life into that person. So, if everyone is playing characters, what’s the point of awarding someone specifically as a ‘Character Actor’?”

Vijayaraghavan went on to argue that he played the lead role in Pookkaalam, and so did Urvashi. “In a story that unfolds from beginning to end, the person who drives the narrative is the protagonist. The terms ‘hero’ and ‘protagonist’ are often used interchangeably, but I think they are different. Lead roles aren’t always glamorous or central in the conventional sense. But if lead performances are being recognised, we should have been considered for those too.”

Questioning how acting is assessed in award settings, the actor said, “If it were a race, you could say someone came first or second. But how do you compare one performance with another, especially when the roles are completely different? I played Ittup, a 100-year-old man. Shah Rukh played someone else entirely. Urvashi had her own role. You can’t really compare these performances — each one is unique and personal.”

He added, “If ten people are playing the same character — say Krishna or Bhima — maybe then you can decide who did it best. But when each actor is playing a role that is so distinct, how can there be a standard?”

According to Vijayaraghavan, many awards are often distributed in a way that ensures everyone gets something. “This isn’t new. It’s been happening for years. If that’s the case, why not award three or four people in a category, if they’re all deserving? Why limit it to just one?”

He echoed sentiments recently expressed by fellow actor Urvashi, saying, “What she said is absolutely right. I don’t act for awards. I act because I love cinema and because the audience loves me. If awards were my goal, I would have quit a long time ago.”

“I’ve spent over five decades in acting — nearly 55 years if you count my years in theatre. To me, a flower from a child and a national award hold the same emotional value. Audience appreciation is the biggest award I can receive,” he said.

Concluding his thoughts, Vijayaraghavan emphasised that acting, by its very nature, resists competition. “Either you treat awards as just recognition and stop comparing, or you turn it into a contest and stick by the jury’s decisions. But you can’t have it both ways. These debates have gone on for years, and I don’t think they’re going to stop any time soon.”