Movies: Wonderland versus Reality

It seems that the days when Bollywood movies used to be harbingers of fantasy are coming to an end. The burgeoning middle class, which has been made economically stronger by the fruits of the Liberalization-Globalization-Privatization (LPG) era, seems to be developing an appetite for movies that project reality. The "silver screen" isn't expected to portray demi-gods and demi-goddesses romantically dancing around trees and in grasslands anymore. If there is an element of entertainment in the movies, it has to be invariably interlaced with information—to give rise to "infotainment".

Movies and Reality

The current climate in the Indian movies seems to be veering towards a projection of the hard facts of the society. Take the case of the movie 'Oh My God'. The movie brilliantly conveyed to the audience how certain sections of the society indulge in commodification of religion, spiritual beliefs, talismans and in propagation of idolatry by deifying material objects to serve their own vested interests. It is no wonder that the movie had drawn sharp criticism from the intolerant sections of our country—sections that consider it their birth-right to get offended at every possible work of art, even if the bona fide intent of the work is to bring positive social reform.

Another positive role played by the movies has been to portray systemic failures, i.e., failure, for various reasons, in the working of the institutions of the State. The movies Khakee, Yahaan, Shaurya are some of the stalwarts in this area. Then, the movie Swades had tried to bring out the development deficit in the rural areas of India and had tried to link it with the phenomenon of "brain drain". It is a pity that though such movies receive huge critical acclaim, they do not perform so well at the box-office! Movies have an educational role too. They try to enliven in the memories of the people important historical events, e.g., Richard Attenborough's English movie Gandhi. Movies try to spread awareness about art and culture; they also help in the promotion of tourism.

The ushering of a "new age" in the movies has seen various filmmakers (actors and producers), prominent among them being Anurag Kashyap, Prakash Jha, Shoojit Sircar, Farhan Akhtar, trying to rope in new themes for their creations. Farhan Akhtar displayed this in the movie Zindagi Na Milegi Dobara, in which he tried to portray the need of Work-Life Balance and the negatives of an excessive desire for materialistic success. In the movie Chakravyuh, Prakash Jha tried to bring out a fictionalized story set in the backdrop of Left-Wing Extremism, which has (in the words of former Prime Minister Manmohan Singh) emerged as the biggest internal security challenge to India. Shoojit Sircar tried to bring out the fictionalized versions of terrorism in Jammu & Kashmir in his movie Yahaan and the Indian intelligence operations in the civil war between the Sri Lankan government and the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE) in his movie Madras Cafe. He also subtly-yet-boldly projected the theme of sperm donation and related societal mindsets in his movie Vicky Donor. Then, filmmakers have also tried to bring widespread popularity to sportspersons through their movies—Milkha Singh ("Flying Sikh") in Bhaag Milkha Bhaag and MC Mary Kom in the movie Mary Kom.

Movies on a different pedestal?

Why are movies treated at a different pedestal when it comes to setting the standards for their content? The main reason seems to be the widespread grasp of movies on the minds of the people as compared to other forms of mass media. This is, perhaps, because of the combined effect of the literary content and dialogue delivery interlaced with background score and powerful visuals. Also, watching a movie doesn't require reading skills (necessary for print media), access to television sets (necessary for electronic media) or access to smartphones/computers (necessary for social media). Thus, it is no wonder that movies seem to grab the headlines much before they are released—when they apply for a certification from the Central Board of Film Certification (CBFC). What is a cause of concern, though, is the fine line between censorship and editorship. Many-a-time (e.g., in the recent case of CBFC Chairman Pahlaj Nihalani's issuance of a list of "cuss words" that were to be prohibited to be used in movies and the subsequent withdrawal of the list after it was vociferously objected to by various filmmakers as an attempt to bring in totalitarianism by stifling creative freedom), this fine line has been disregarded. Another scenario is when certain state governments issue diktats to ban the screening of a particular movie on the pretext that it may otherwise inflame public sentiment and may thus create law and order problems. A case in point is that of the English movie Dam 999 whose screening was banned by Tamil Nadu government. The movie was perceived to be loosely based on the issue of the Mullaperiyar Dam, a contentious issue between Tamil Nadu and Kerala.

The 'star' culture

A noteworthy phenomenon of the Indian movies has been the creation of "celebrity-culture" or a "star-culture". The audience, especially the people belonging to the lower social-economic strata and the youth, elevate the actors to the level of demi-gods and demi-goddesses. This is further compounded by the other forms of mass media, whose journalists and the paparazzi clamour and fight hard to capture every small event of the actors' lives. Important airtime of the electronic media may be devoted to the changed hairstyles of the "celebrities" even at the cost of social issues such as poverty and hunger, because such "trivial issues" do not seem to generate enough Television Rating Points (TRPs) for the news channels. Sometimes, this hunger for celebrity news assumes the proportion of encroachment upon the private lives of these "stars". Some of the best examples in this category are those of the late M.G. Ramachandran ("MGR"), the late N.T. Rama Rao ("NTR") and Rajinikanth (born Shivaji Rao Gaekwad).

Movie celebrities are paid to perform or are present as chief guests at various functions organized by corporate entities and state governments, and even at private functions of politicians and wealthy individuals of the corporate world. They are also employed by various national and multinational companies as 'brand endorsers' (a phenomenon that cannot be overlooked due to the necessity of advertising and 'marketing' in the market economy). An observation, that I recently made in this regard, is of movie actors endorsing 'pan masala' products. Perhaps the companies, which hitherto used to make chewing tobacco and snuff, have been so remorseful after being chided by various Supreme Court and High Court judgments for gifting leukoplakia (precancerous white-coloured lesions in the mouth) and oral, esophageal, pancreatic cancers to the people of India that they have resorted to the employment of movie "stars" as brand-endorsers of pan masala, etc., to bring home the point to Indians that they need to freshen-up their mouths by savouring new attractively-packaged aromatic vitriolic products. What is funny is that I remember one of these very actors uttering in a dialogue in some movie that film "stars" who endorse some products in television commercials do not even sniff those products in real life!

"With Great Power comes Great Responsibility"

Given the large level of trust that is placed on the movie actors, who are treated as idols, there should be a sense of responsibility among the film actors towards the society. I quote a dialogue from the movie 'Lakshya' (even though taken out of context)—"...ye vishwaas bahut badi izzat hai aur bahut badi zimmedaari bhi"—this belief is a large honour as well as a large responsibility. Some of the positive work done by movie actors are the social initiative 'Men Against Rape and Discrimination' (MARD) by Farhan Akhtar and the positive work done by Celina Jaitley for the rights of the Lesbian-Gay-Bisexual-Transgender (LGBT) community, to mention a few.

But then, there are bad apples too. Salman Khan's positive initiatives through his NGO 'Being Human' may be grounds for, at the maximum, getting a remission of his prison sentence for crushing pavement dwellers under the wheels of his Sports Utility Vehicle. But his positive work carried out later does not absolve him of all the guilt. And then there was another "celebrity" singer Abhijeet Bhattacharya who compared pavement dwellers with dogs in his tweet; luckily for him, he apologized for his irresponsible comments. Sadly, wealthy actors rope in rich lawyers to bail them out of jail even as a large number of undertrials languish in the Indian prisons, sometimes for time periods crossing even the maximum sentence proscribed under law for the crime for which they were accused.

Another issue to be considered is the one of brand endorsements by celebrities, especially after the current nationwide ban on Nestle Maggi by the Food Safety and Standards Authority of India (FSSAI). Movie actors do have every right to endorse products as this fundamental right is covered under the Article 19 of the Constitution of India—freedom of speech and expression (for commercial purposes) and well as freedom of occupation (because the endorsement provides them with earnings). While it may be argued that the brand endorsers of the product couldn't have possibly known about the nutritional value of the product given that it is a thing of technical nature, that the product had already been cleared as safe by the food regulators, and that the actors cannot (in any manner) be held accountable for mens rea or for having mala fide intentions, there certainly has to be some degree of accountability. This is because the endorsers have a hegemonic stronghold on the minds of the vulnerable sections of the consumers. If movie actors are qualified to be awarded with Padma awards for excellence in their fields as well as for benefiting the society by their acts, they should be accountable to the society for an endorsed product that has been found unsuitable, more so if it is a food product. The least they could do is to issue public statements to forbid people from using any product if it is found unfit for use and to express that they had endorsed the product when they had no knowledge of any harm caused by it.

Then, there should be a certain dignified conduct by actors. There was widespread condemnation of the performance of Madhuri Dixit, Salman Khan, etc., on the concluding day of the Saifai Mahotsav in Uttar Pradesh (U.P.) even as many victims of the Muzaffarnagar Riots were suffering in makeshift camps and weren't even fully rehabilitated. While the "celebrities" might have promoted tourism and culture in the eyes of the U.P. state government, the function was widely criticized by various quarters among the civil society and the political parties for the huge fanfare amidst penury of the communal riot victims.

To conclude, it can be said that though the paparazzi shouldn't encroach upon the lives of the movie actors, the movie actors too must realize their responsibility towards the same society that has aggrandized them to the level of "stars" of the "silver screen".

Nostalgia

Sometimes, a seemingly unfortunate occurrence may later on lead to an experience that ends on an entirely different positive note. Losing my Driving Licence, which I had kept in a [now stolen] wallet, gave me a reason compelling enough to re-visit the place where I had spent the foundational years of my life (because my licence was issued by the Regional Transport Office lying in the district under which the aforementioned place falls).

Srinagar Garhwal (henceforth referred to as Srinagar) used to be (when I was a child) a small town located in the Garhwal Commissionary of the hill state Uttarakhand (carved out of Uttar Pradesh state on 9 November 2000) in India. Historically, it used to be the Capital of the Garhwal Kingdom till 1804 AD. This was after the king Ajay Pal shifted his capital from Chamoli (the erstwhile Chandpurgarhi) to this place. At present, this place is the largest city (though its expanse is nowhere when compared to that of the cities in the plains of India) in the Garhwal hills. Srinagar is accessible from Dehradun, the capital of Uttarakhand, by road; the distance is about 150 km. The city has a Municipality and administratively, it is a tehsil under the Pauri Garhwal district. The city is home to Hemwati Nandan Bahuguna (HNB) Garhwal University, Government Medical College (Srikot), [presently] National Institute of Technology (Sumari) and the Sashastra Seema Bal (SSB) Officers' Training Academy. Situated on the left bank of the river Alaknanda (which is the largest tributary—in terms of water content—of the river Ganga), Srinagar is situated at an average elevation of 560 m above mean sea level. Contrary to the popular perception, the situation of Srinagar as a hill city doesn't reward it with an affable climate. It sees extremes of temperatures—hot summers and cold winters.

As I neared the police check-post at Srinagar Garhwal on 5 May 2015 (after a gap of almost 4 years) I realized that everything has changed in Srinagar, yet nothing has changed. The city had to bear the brunt of the 2013 Uttarakhand deluge. The river Alaknanda in all its fury submerged the buildings near the banks under enormous amount of debris. Yet today, except for some visible signs of the destruction in the areas near the banks, most of the city seems to have stood resilient in the face of adversity (even though I have been one among the 'locals' of Srinagar for a long time, this account can be considered to be of a 'local tourist' because I had stayed there for just two nights during my sojourn). However, I certify that despite having stayed there for a very brief period, I enjoyed undisturbed-untroubled sleep during the nights. Despite all the hardships that the people of the hills have to face, most of the the hill folks are innately unassuming (although, of late, materialist influences have started to make their foray in this city—all thanks to the revenue generated by the tourism industry during the 'Char Dham Yatra' and the 'Hemkund Sahib Yatra' as also the influx of the mining mafia in the hills). I felt inner solace when I met my old neighbours as well as an old classmate, almost all of who couldn't recognize me in the first instance and cited the reason that I have changed a lot during the passage of the intervening years.

I would like to take a short detour. Even as many of my fellow Indians were busy expressing solidarity with Salman Khan when he was convicted by a sessions court and awarded a 5-year rigorous imprisonment for drunk-driving and trampling pavement-dwellers, I felt much better off by switching-off the television (which I anyway seldom watch) and then enjoying the beauty of the Garhwal hills. Perhaps Mr Khan realized what it is being human [as the accusations against him go] after having hunted chinkaras and black-bucks in 1998 and trampling humans in 2002. As for Mr Abhijeet Bhattacharya, even though you have apologized in public (and it's good that you have done so), let me re-iterate that your tweets were simply unacceptable. To hell with what you did when you had no work, pavement-dwellers are not dogs; you may have intentioned to support a fellow Bollywood personality who runs an NGO by the name "Being Human" but 'being human' includes conferring a compassionate treatment even on animals (and not trampling them under the wheels of your vehicle).

I have uploaded some photographs which I had clicked during my sojourn at Srinagar Garhwal. Some people opine that a picture is worth a thousand words. I hope that the following pictures are able to present glimpses of what I would like to refer to as my 'personal paradise'. I say—"Kuchh din to guzaaro mere Srinagar Garhwal mein" (please spend some days in my Srinagar Garhwal).

'Aithana' ('ऐठाणा') village

'Aithana' ('ऐठाणा') village

'Aithana' ('ऐठाणा') village

Trek Route from 'Aithana' ('ऐठाणा') village to Ashthavakra ('अष्ठावक्र') temple; trekking along this path in the morning brought back memories of school days when I used to go for this trek alongwith some of my classmates

Pine trees or Pinus roxburghii ('चीड़'); as per one story, these were introduced to Uttarakhand hills by the British who wanted to exploit them for their commercial value; due to the high resin content in their wood, they are used as firewood and their 'needles' almost form a near-ubiquitous carpet on the hills because of which the hills become highly prone to forest fires (दावानल)

Natural Carpet formed by the 'needles' of Pine trees

Female Cone of Pine tree

Alas! Excessive human intervention is turning out to be bad for the hills. Is this what 'Being Human' is?

A part of Srinagar Garhwal (photograph captured from an elevated spot on a hill)

Blue Jacaranda or Jacaranda mimosifolia (the violet-flowered tree)

We Love Cricket!

We love cricket, don't we? After all, isn't that what gives India the feeling of being a nation? Despite having a myriad of religions, Indians have a common religion—cricket. Cricket is so much in our blood that the Government of India had practised even "cricket diplomacy" to improve Indo- Pak relations. And why shouldn't we love cricket? The "gentlemen's game" is indeed one of the precious legacies left to us by the colonial rulers.

We love cricket. Cricket is so important that we cannot keep ourselves from sharing even split-second occurrences of what goes on and outside that sacred 22-yard distance and of what goes on in the lives of cricketers on and off the field. After we lose 'very important' cricket matches, some of us vent our ire on certain cricketers and their personal lives, and some others express our solidarity with them in their 'moments of crisis'. We get emotional and enthusiastic, we scream on the top of our voices, we give expert advice to cricketers on how to play and how not to play—after all, we can't afford to show laxity given that we are dealing with the pan-Indian religion. We "bleed blue" and we almost overlook those who bleed to death. On 26 March 2015, social media was replete with pictures, videos and messages about the Indian cricket team because we had lost a world cup semi-final match to Australia. And this was a very important event, wasn't it? The electronic media chose to highlight this, given the fact that electronic media houses can't afford to overlook it. And why not? Overlooking it would certainly be inimical to their business interests. The same day, the news of a Dornier-228 of the Navy crashing off the Coast of Goa (even when it was an event that happened on 24 March 2015) could scarcely make its presence felt in the electronic media; the print media seemed to be much more concerned than its electronic counterpart about the Indian Navy personnel involved in the crash. There were very rare instances of people forwarding this news through Instant Messaging applications or through social media websites. Two young officers in their 20s—Lieutenant Kiran Shekhawat and Sub-Lieutenant Abhinav Nagori—lost their lives in watery graves. But should we have bothered about it? They bled to death in the course of their job, while the Indian cricket team had gone to perform a 'national duty'.

We love cricket. We do not use social media, not even in the form of one-liners, to spread awareness about the death of the cragsman Malli Mastan Babu even when he used to unfurl the Indian flag on the summits that he scaled. His being an alumnus of some of the most prestigious educational institutions of the country even when he had been from an economically-underprivileged background isn't a qualification good enough to make a social media presence felt posthumously; understandable it is, because he wasn't connected with cricket.

We love cricket. We don't mind expelling some university students if they felt like supporting the Pakistani cricket team. After all, such an act would be an insult to the integrity of India, wouldn't it? We deify cricketers. We post photoshopped images on the social media—images that show Maria Sharapova genuflecting in front of Sachin Tendulkar because she had earlier expressed ignorance about the "God of Cricket". Why shouldn't we? Ignorance about the God of Cricket is tantamount to ignorance about the God of the pan-Indian religion.

We love cricket. It is apt that when the Government of India decides to bestow the Bharat Ratna—the highest civilian honour—upon a sportsperson, it should inadvertently be on a cricketer.

In Shakespeare's Julius Caesar, Marcus Antonius had repeatedly used the phrase "honourable men" to convey something to the "friends, Romans, countrymen". I hope that my erudite readers will be quick to establish a relation between my resort to the sentence "We love cricket" and a usage of the aforementioned phrase in Julius Caesar.

LETTER to SADNESS (upon HER DEATH)

Dear SADNESS,

I came to know about your painful death a day ago. It is a different thing, though, that I would not have allowed you to enter my door. You had tried your level best to demolish my sense of self and engulf me in your arms. You did this by trying to trace the footsteps of your father, FAILURE, who entered my home as a guest just two days back.

I believe it is my duty to inform you posthumously that you had lost your way when you tried to enter my door. You fell into the moat created by my strong conviction and by the moral support my well-wishers have rendered to me. You were unaware that your father has been a very dear friend of mine; I learn more from him than from anyone else.

I consider it my duty to inform you posthumously that I got to hear some of the most encouraging statements from my well-wishers after your father entered my home as a guest. They have told me that irrespective of the position I hold in life, irrespective of my professional standing, they will always have faith in me. Even if I am not able to maintain regular communication links with them owing to the exigencies of the pursuit of my current endeavour, they believe in what I do and stand by me.

I know it is my duty to inform you posthumously that I have bettered as a human being, as the years passed by, while pursuing my goal of self-actualization. Your father hasn't killed me; he has made me stronger. He has made my value known to a large number of people in life; many of the seemingly successful people cannot claim to have amassed such an enormous human capital during all this while. I have truly witnessed my Idea of India, given that people from all corners of India (and some even residing overseas), people used to working in diverse work environments, and people belonging to diverse social and economic backgrounds, have expressed solidarity with me. I wish to tell you—your father has felt proud that he visited my home. I also know that I can rightfully claim to have achieved a level of personal development many others can only dream to achieve. Even though my efforts may not seem to have achieved the desired outcome yet, they have prepared an intense groundwork of roots (in just the same way as the roots of bamboo) for me to stand upon; they have strengthened my foundation.

While I wish (keeping in my mind the norms of common courteous conduct) that your soul may rest in peace, I unabashedly tell you that your presence will not be tolerated by me. Your soul may not resuscitate itself because my well-wishers believe in me and I believe in myself. My suggestion to you is to not disguise yourself and to not re-enter my home upon your re-birth, as the shock of another defeat may not be bearable for you.

Yours never,

Vitthal