Everybody who has ever read a book and seen a movie-version of the book, or a movie based on the book, knows that it is almost impossible to make the two identical. Of course movies have to cut things out of books to fit the whole film within a certain time slot, but movies also usually have tendencies to add things that spice up the movie, or things that would supposedly make the movie more appealing than the book. This is no different in the case of reading the book, The Guide, by R.K. Narayan and watching the corresponding movie. Certain different events happen all throughout the movie as compared to the book, but probably the biggest and most important difference lies in the ending of each work.
In both the book and the movie, the main character, Raju, has fasted in order to bring rain to his “people”. He is almost tricked or guilted into doing so because he told a messenger boy that he was going to fast until the people of his village stopped fighting. The messenger misinterpreted this and told the villagers that Raju was going to fast for rain, just like in the stories of old that he had told them. The end of the fast in both the novel and the movie leaves Raju in an extremely weak and frail position. In the book, Raju walks into the river to perform his daily prayer ritual, although he is barely walking and is supported on one side by his most devoted follower, Velan, and is supported on the other side by an unnamed person. Once Raju is in the river, he begins to mutter his daily prayers, while being held upright solely by those supporting him. Raju then turns to Velan and says, “Velan, it’s raining in the hills. I can feel it coming up under my feet, up my legs –“ Narayan then chooses to leave the ending of the book wide open to reader interpretation by then saying, “He sagged down.” As a reader, it is impossible to know for sure whether or not Raju dies or not. Earlier in the paragraph it mentions how Raju had frequently flopped down into the river, because he was so weak. We therefore don’t know whether he is simply exhausted, or if he has indeed died in the river. Another thing is that he says that “it’s raining in the hills”, which means that the reader never has factual evidence whether or not it is actually raining like Raju says. Is Raju reverting back to his tendency of lying to please himself and/or others? Or is Raju sincere in the fact that it is indeed raining in the hills? No one will ever know for sure because Narayan leaves it so wide open.
The movie, however, ends more concretely, or leaves much less room for audience interpretation. In the movie, Raju is praying in the temple, not the river, and it begins to rain all of a sudden. This is already greatly different than the novel because we actually see the rain come. Once the rain comes, the villagers are filled with jubilation as they begin to cheer and dance. Raju then goes to a different room in the temple to lie down. Here he speaks with God, in an enchanting scene, which never happens in the novel. Rosie then rushes into the room to discover that Raju has indeed died, and is immediately stricken with grief. In the case of the movie, the audience is clearly able to see that Raju has indeed died, but not before bringing rain for the villagers.
The differing events in the book and the novel are not what make the two different, but instead the true difference lies in what these events mean and portray. The novel leaves Raju’s last moments open to interpretation, meaning that the reader is free to decide whether or not Raju has truly changed and whether or not he actually able to bring rain. This paints Raju in an air of mystery, because the reader never knows for sure what happens, and therefore doesn’t exactly know how to see Raju at the end of the novel. Rather than seeing Raju as purely good, or purely unchanged, the reader is left to formulate their own opinion as to how they see Raju. The movie, however, paints such a concrete view of Raju, that the viewer isn’t able to formulate his or her own opinion of Raju, because he is portrayed as being purely good by the end of the film. Rosie, his mother, and even Gaffur come back and immediately accept Raju back into their lives, which show that even the people in the story think that Raju is purely good. This is furthered by the fact that Raju actually brings rain to the villagers, and because he talks with God before dying. How can you be more concretely portrayed as good and pure, than by receiving confirmation of your good deeds from God?!
Like I said earlier, I believe that The Guide is no exception to the common differences between movies and novels. Movies tend to glorify things and make other things easier for viewers to understand, such as in The Guide. Novels, however, tend to leave things more open to interpretation, such as in The Guide. I think that it is important to note the differences in between the two, and to make sure that if you see the movie, that you also read the book, because movies tend to change things. In the case of The Guide, the book and the movie leave you with one burning question: Which Raju did you see?