Fundamentalists should protest cinema in its language only !
Now clouds of fundamentalism are trying to eclipse Parzania, which is supposed to be based on Gujarat Riots happened after Godhara incident. Bajrang Dal, an small outfit of big Sangh family has imposed self claimed ban over the film.
Such bans are not very old in India. India was much more civilized and much more patient country till 70s when MS Sathyu made and released a film like Garam Hawa. With the rise of Shiv Sena in Bombay its interference in film making started and I can recall when Shahanshah was released then Shiv Sena had protested the film and Shiv Sainiks tried to stop the screening of the film in Bombay because protest was helping non-congressi politicians movement to remove Rajiv Gandhi from the political scenario of India. Bofors was the case and along with Rajiv Gandhi, Amitabh Bachchan, then being close friend of Rajiv, was also the target of opposition. But it was an Amitabh Bachchan film and people rushed to the cinema halls and Shiv Sainiks could not do much destruction. There was a cartoon in a national daily news paper where few Shiv Sainiks were shown on the booking window of a cinema hall, they were hiding their identity which could have shown them, as related to Shiv Sena and they were asking tickets for the film.
When Tamas was telecasted on TV in late 80s then there were some protests but that did not deter its telecast and people saw this serial and later it was edited to convert it in to the film.
Gulzaar’s Maachis had clear political tone but it was not protested on roads and inspite of disagreement of lots of people in the society about the one sided depiction of Punjab problem, film was praised and awarded and got commercial success too. Gulzaar’s direction extracted out a better actress out of an average actress Tabu. She was known as Ruk Ruk girl then but Maachis changed her acting life forever.
MF Hussain’s paintings, where he painted nude Hindu goddesses Sarswati and Durga, generated first major protests. Though paintings were old which he had made in early years of 70s but social scenario during early years of 90s was very sensitive in the country especially in the light of aftermath of December 1992. Political scene was seriously polarised and with the brutal murder of Rajiv Gandhi there was no leader alive who had national appeal. One time small parties were gaining power on emotional and regional issues. Political instability and new equations in Indian politics started affecting art and culture also.
Late Prime minister Morarji Desai was awarded Nishan-i-Pakistan, highest civil award of Pakistan, It was accepted, Atal Bihari Vajpai as PM of India was given same award, It was digestible for Shiv Sena and Bajrang Dal but when veteran actor A.K Hangal was bestowed some Pakistani award for his contribution to cinema, then self claimed lion, Shiv Sena Supremo Bala Saheb Thakrey could not digest this and he ordered poor Ak hangal to return the award else – He warned film community that whoever will give work to Hangal in their films, will have to see consequences. He ordered producers of Sholay, to cut the scenes from the film, where AK Hangal is shown. It was reported in newspaper that during those days Sholay was shown in Bombay with this edited version. Now Poor AK Hangal has no political support so a humble actor had to suffer badly in his old age. Acting is his profession and if he does not get roles in films how will he earn? Dilip Kumar was also awarded same Nishan-i-Pakistan award and he also faced wrath of Bala Saheb Thakray and his Shiv Sainiks. Shiv Sainiks even did naked protest outside of his residence in Bombay. Now Dilip Kumar had a voice and support in society so he could manage to handle Shiv Saina’s protest. Dilip Kumar went to then PM of India Atal Bihari Vajpai and asked him what he should do in such scenario, If you say I should return award I will return it but save the country from vandalism.
Being experienced politician Vajpai suggested him to do what he feels right.
MF Husaain is a big name, he got support from large section of society. Rather he saw unprecedented popularity in 90s. His cyncism increased and he organised an exhibition and called it Shwetambari and hanged white sheets on the walls and whole floor of the hall was covered with newspapers. That was the art!!!!!
But its not an easy task to support a cynical artist like Hussain. His activities have been very ambiguous. He has his contribution in increasing confusion among supporters of free expression at least in art. He got full support when he depicted hindu goddesses as nude and he took few years to say his apologies, if he hurt feelings of any section of society. But he made “Meenakshi – A Tale of 3 cities” where he had kept a Qawalli, composed by AR Rehman. Some small Islamic organisation based in Kerala protested the lyrics of Qawalli that they are against the nature of Islam and Hussain did not take more then 2 days, to take down the film from screening. Yash Raj Films had distributed the film and Hussain asked them to remove the film from the cinema halls. Hussain could have removed the song but he swallowed all the talks of freedom of expression etc. He went in to hiding so that he would not be facing any question.
Now came the “Fire” a film made and directed by Deepa Mehta. Film was supposedly based on a short story “Lihaf” written by Late Ismat Chugtai, an Urdu authoress. Story is written in the backdrop of lesbianism and all the characters in the story are muslim. But Deepa Mehta being flag bearer of progressive movement in art, converted her characters as Hindus and it was all fine but she kept her main lady character’s name as Seeta and Radha. Now “Fire” is very ordinary film and its protest by Shiv Sena and Bajrang Dal rather help it to make a popular film. It was no where going to see any commercial success. Shiv Sena and Bajrang dal imposed self claimed ban over “Fire” and Shabana Azami, Javed Akhtar, Dilip Kumar and Mahesh Bhatt went to Supreme court against this interference and court gave verdict that nobody can impose ban over the film and cinema halls have to screen the film.
It looks very good in reading in news paper but Deepa Mehta, being a woman and if she claims to be sensible and sensitive person and director, could have avoided this controversy. She could have shown maturity. Her film does not demand that she keeps names of her central characters who are involved in lesbian relationship, on the names of two women, famous in history and revered by Hindus. If she kept names Sunita and Vibha it was not going to bring less effect of the film. But by remaining adamant on names she helped fundamentalists to disrupt the law and order in the country. In an unbiased analysis of the whole event Deepa Mehta is no less culprit then these fundamentalist organisations.
And Shaban Azami, Javed Akhtar, Dilip Kumar and Mahesh Bhatt too are not less culprit because they did not go in to court when some Muslim fundamentalist organisation banned MF Husaain’s film. Such biased approach destroy the harmony in the society. They all are culprit. If you like justice then do it for all without any biased approach. Dilip Kumar is old and he could be spared but what about Mahesh Bhatt, Shabana Azami and Javed Akhtar who are very vocal in any case, why they kept mum in Hussain’s case.
Its not strange that when Deepa Mehta declared her next film as Water, she was protested heavily in Banaras where she wanted to shoot. Logically its not good to stop any film maker making his/her film but her past history of film “Fire” produced hurdles before her. How moderate people will support her case of cases of Mr Bhatt, Shabana etc because they are selective in their protests. They are not equally justified in their doings. They dont raise matters on the basis of merit rather they do it on the basis of their own convinience.
It was not possible fundamentalist organisations to make a counter film on “Fire” but certainly they can reply Deepa Mehta or any film maker as far as film like Water is concerned. If they think she has shown Hindu traditions in wrong manner then they can ask few directors who they think can understand the subject to make a right film.
Same happens with Parzania, if they think subject is biased then Gujarat govt or Bajrang Dal can make it possible to produce a right film which can depict the subject in a manner which they think is right.
Message is clear that protestors and film makers both group have to live in same society and they both have to understand their responsibility. Biased approach wont work and blind support and blind protest don’t help any society.
Even now if a film maker wish to make a sensitive film without creating controversy then it can be done. Aparna Sen did that with Mr and Mrs Aiyar. This Single film was far far better and heavy weight then the all hitherto creative work of Deepa Mehta.
Fandamentalism should not be tolerated at any cost but free hand also should not be given to some foolish film makers or artists who dont have balanced approach and whose foolishness can create more troubles in already disturbed India. This is the only way to make a better enduring and progressive society.
[ " In nature there are neither Rewards nor Punishments , There are only Consequences “ ]
Anurag Kashyap
Abhay Deol
Dibakar Banerjee
Hansal Mehta
Khalid Mohamed
Kundan Shah
Anish Kuruvilla
Jaideep Verma
Manish Gupta
Navdeep Singh
Bhavani Iyer
D. Santosh
Onir
Ashvin Kumar
Ramu Ramanathan
Sudhir Mishra
Pankaj Advani
Revathy
Saurabh Shukla
Shilpa Shukla
Sujoy Ghosh
Suparn Verma
Santosh Sivan
Shashank Ghosh
Shivajee
Pavan Kaul
Partho Sen-Gupta
Prroshant Naryannan
Sam Langoria
Satish Kasetty
What more can I say but that it’s scary and sad. More scary though.
Damn good post my friend, damn good.
freedom in art in india means being fearless and taking responsibility for yourself -not to depend on anyone else to come and rescue you or your work – this is how i feel as of today – hopefully it will change to something a bit more positive in time to come.
CT: small ripples are nothing in vast pool. it will be settled.
Smriti Vij :
I wish artists and filmmakers become this much understanding as you are indicating and do whose consequences they can bear.
When someone know that AIDS virus is spreading then one has to take care of its safety itself. Govt. always alone cant do everything. Responsible work may create responsible atmosphere. Because sometimes even moderate people dont supoort someone’s 3rd work because they see that in his first and second work this person was not honest to the cause and they keep mum and fundamentalists look strong.
i hope Rk – i hope. Havent even started yet, dont even know what are the waters i’ll choose to tread upon – but to me this seems like the truth so wrote – feel a bit negative today. not good. things will change..lets hope.
smiriti: things will certainly change as change is the only constant factor in life. Our country has 1000 M inhabitants and we can find any kind of person here be it bald, one eyed, lame, genius, mentally retarded, mentally destroyed, liberal, bold, moderate, rigid etc etc.
So something will always be happening. Its a happening country after all.
Incredible India as they show in advertisement all over world now:)
fantastic article …. ^:)^ ^:)^ ^:)^ ^:)^
Fire was inspired from Lihaaf ???? the film and the short story, though have lesbian angles, are poles apart in terms of characterisations…
How does it matter if the names are Seeta and Radha ??? These are common hindu names. I mean I don’t think she kept these names specifically as a reference to hindu godesses. Was she really adamant that the names were chosen to mirror hindu deities ???
Expecting someone like Shabana azmi and Javed sahib to be supportive for all matters is somehwat unreasonable. They talk about Slum dwellers in mumbai as well. They will talk about watever cause they feel strongly about. The point is, we cannot expect them to stand up in support for each and every cause.
Like for eg: they do not stand up for animal rights (unlike Maneka gandhi)…probably because they do not feel strongly about the cause. Do we hold it against them ???
One thing that I do not understand is that how are film makers responsible for the betterment and progress of a society ??? Why should they be responsible ???
By the same logic (albeit in a different context), Is Ekta kapoor responsible towards her audience ??? Why should she be ?? She can make regressive, stereotypical serials, and if people want, they are free to choose to watch them (like my mom) or ignore them (like me).
Why should any creative person be held responsible to the society ??? Why should there be a censor board or the self appointed moral guardians ???
Film makers are not the law … or politicians … or social workers… or beurucrats. Why should they be held responsible to the society ????
Funny that this came up, am involved in a heated discussion about ‘anti-Indian bitch’ Deepa Mehta on an Orkut community too !!
Btw, I don’t think the objections to ‘Fire’ began on the pretext of the names Sita and Radha (is Radha a goddess, anyway?). The initial furore, if I remember correctly, was that the film depicted lesbianism, which was alien to Indian culture, or something like that. It was one of the first issues that the VHP, Shiv Sena and BJP bonded on, I think.
However, Deepa Mehta does seem to attract controversy. For instance, consider this: there is an old Malayalam movie named ‘Parinayam’ (Change) depicting the plight of young Brahmin widows, and narrating the tale of a widow who gets pregnant. It was a much-acclaimed film, and went to plenty of film festivals, but I don’t remember it generating any negative publicity. ‘Water’ deals with a similar topic, but look at all the furore it has cooked up. Some people have a knack for it, I guess
. She’s a damn good director, though!
Kartik:
Thanks for comments:
Theory is often different the practical. We must know which society we are living in. Closing eyes towards reality dont enhance creativity in any way.
1) names: You did not think or answer, does it affect quality of film “Fire” if female lead characters were not having names Seeta and Radha rather they were Sunita and Vibha. It was different perspective film and if some people were trying to stop the film under the excuse of names then a wise film maker will change the name because importance is attached with film as a total product and not in names of some characters. who cares what names she keeps in normal time. Rather not many cared what she used to make.
If We go by your logic then why Deepa did not dare to shoot in Banaras for her next film Water? Govt and court could have provided her enough security. Fact is she got popularity post Fire and for water before shooting so her purpose was done, she had generated curiosity about her film. Now pls dont come up with idea that film makers dont do such stunts to fetch attraction.
coming back to whats special in name and Seeta and Radha are two most common names. Mohammad is most popular name in the world and Mohd Azaharuddin was brand ambassador of Adidas shoes and Company had inscribed his name on the shoes while launched some models in India, it was heavily protested and Co had to take back and Azhar had to appologise. When society is passing through some sensitive phase then only a foolish will fuel the matter. If its connected with religious thing then its more worse. To know if Deepa was adament on keeping those particular names you will have to dig the case.
Take name’s example on personal ground and perhaps you will eb able to see the point.
Wisdome does not lie in confrontation. Deepa Mehta or any film maker is not a torch bearer of truth. They make films for soceity so they have to follow certain norms else they can make any film for their personal viewing only in their own home theaters. But they ask audience and audience come from society and thats why they have responsibility towards society.
2). No I dont expect Shabana or Javed Akhtar to take in their hand every matter under the sun but certainly they cant do pick and choose in same matter. Either they support freedom of expression theory or they dont. They cant do this that when Fire is banned then they raise voice but when Meenakshi is banned then they go on holidays to escape. Thats shows only cowardice and not bravity or liberal attitude for which Ms Azami has been getting awards. From where you got idea that Javed Akhtar raises matter related to slums?:o Shabana did that long ago before becoming MP. They have more serious matters to raise now. I hope you can see different behaviour in same kind of incidences. Freedom of expression was on stake in both cases. If so called hindu fundamentalists have become strong then Shabana Azami, Javed Akhtar, Mahesh Bhatt and Dilip Kumar etc are equally responsible because their double standard turned many many moderate people in to silent people, those who supported them in case of Fire were shocked to see their silence in case of Meenakshi. Hope you are aware of her pathetic position when a religious priest of her religion called her by names on a TV programe. She could not come out on road to protest. it needs guts to do that, which she was lacking.
Going by your mind set up which raised such questions abt society, I am not able to understand what I should understand by term society?
Film makers are not law. OK Are doctors? teachers? engineers? or with that matter anyone except judges, beaurocrats and politicians, nobody is responsible towards society ? Only these few category people are responsible to make a better society. Why there should be disciplines in army, police and for that matter, schools. everybody may do what it likes.
Reduce it to family. children may grow like plants grow, why parents shd give them direction.
Surely Ekta Kapoor can make every kind of serial she likes, but even she can not show Tulsi walking in briefs or having sex in open with her husband. Surely producers like her may wish to show it also but they know there is limit because they are showing it to society.
Censor board is not existing to stop a film maker like Satyajit Ray because their creativity travells in right direction. Censor board is there for those Kalidas (Pre knowledge phase) who cuts same branch on which they are sitting.
Here a cartoon published years ago in some remote country creates havoc and you say whats the need of censor board here.
Censor board is for those who can Show Gandhi involved in Masterbation, it really does not matter he did it or not but he has a public image and if you wish to attack on that you must be ready to face consequences. In present time you can not show Dr Ambedkar as you like. You may dislike him but you cant impose your understanding on others. Thats the responsibility towards society. Sculptors were never treated as responsible towards society. They have been getting free hands but films are not individual matter. Films are relatively easy form or art to understand and it affects people in same degree as books do and sometimes even more.
I am not sure you would not complain about a person who recites porn literature loudly infront of your house daily. This is your choice, if you dont like it, close your door, as we say that remote is in our hands and we can chnage the channel. He is not asking you to participate in his endeavour. Why police is after accused of Nithari case? They liked having sex with kids so they did. It was up to those kids that they should have spared themselves. ideally matter is in between parents of kids and accused, why society should be bothered?
There is some order is needed to run anything even PFC. A kind of control is every where.
Ranjit:
Topic of protesting Fire was only this that if you are showing Seeta and Radha involved in lesbianism or homosexuality which is not a recognised form of sex then change the names.
When Dilip Kumar and Mahesh Bhatt etc had gone to court, it wass said from protestors that why Deepa Mehta does not keep names of characters as Saira, or Ayseha (wife and mother of Dilip Kumar)or Shabana which was original name of one actress. Names were great conflict and a sanem mind kind see the uselessness of insisting on keeping the names reverred in large number of people in society. Seeta is wife of Ram, and Radha is lover of Krishna and Ram and Krishna are not characters with whom one can play as they like. Faith is related there. There are many books which raises uncomfortable questions about Ram or Seeta but nobody made furore because books dont affect mass. Films are different matter. You are right that there lies a shrewd business man(woman) in Deepa Mehta and she knows controversy is the only saving grace for kind of films she makes.
@RK: I, personally, see nothing amiss in the characters being named so. In fact, it might have been done symbolically, to denote the agni-pareeksha that Sita was subjected to. However, I do accept that some people might have found it offensive.
My point is this: if a certain section of society objects to the movie, can the movie itself be banned? Certainly, not by any legal means, if the movie has been censored. Sure, disagree with the movie, file a lawsuit against the makers,
dissent in any way you want – as long as you don’t infringe on the rights of the filmmaker. The banning of ‘Fire’ using bullying tactics set a dangerous precedent – which plenty of other movies were soon to fall victim to (’Fanaa’, ‘Water’, ‘Parzania’, ‘Kama Sutra’, ‘Black Friday’ amongst others).
Also, this is a phenomenon somewhat unique to post-1990s India. For instance, there have been controversial movies in the USA, such as Da Vinci Code and Passion of the Christ. However, despite protests, the movies continued to be screened as long as there was no legal order disallowing screening – which is the way things should be.
Btw, Deepa Mehta did change the name Sita to Nita when the movie released in India. The protests continued unabated, giving credence to the view that the protests were political in nature.
I am not a fan of Deepa Mehta and certainly not of “Fire”.. but the use of the names Sita and Radha is almost cheeky blasphemy considering these women first made the idea of women as doormats saleable.. so much so that daily soaps are still living off this ‘tra(sh)dition’.. so to show them as lovers is a total rejection of the historically indispensible patriarchy.. but I agree with the fact that these names have not saved the film from being the mediocre sham that it is.
So while my aesthetic conscience disowns Mehta my ethical conscience cant help but think that she should be allowed to name her characters whatever in hell.. I think the evolution of a people can be understood by the tolerence and therefore non-violence they show towards views different from their own.
Voltaire says it the best:
I may disagree with what you are saying but I will defend to death your right to say it.
Ranjit:
You are very right that nobody can/should ban a film on their own. At the most they can release appeal that people should not see it but in democrarcy they cant stop people to see it. Law is there and people can go to court to seek a ban on the film or book. But what we are talking is an ideal wisdom which we have gained after seeing the events.
Some fraction of mass can be swayed away by people having ill intentions but this happens when ground is ready. Even evils cant do anything on barron land, there has to be something which supports the logic and banning of Satanic Verses had given such ground in India.
Protesters might have been influenced by political agenda in case of Fire but those who protested anarchy generated by Bajrang dal or Shiv sena felt cheated in case of Meenakshi and now in third case, if that happens, there will be less people who oppose such ban. This is the point. I dont support any kind of ban over any film but I see political agendas on both sides, those who impose ban and those who protest bans. So common sense remain there to follow. History asks us to remind our ways in present and future times. If I supported whole heartedly Mahesh Bhatt and Co in case of Fire then my getting hurt in case of Meenaskhi cant be unjustified. Justice cabt be selective.
Incidently I saw this film on TV first and names of characters were Seeta and Radha. Recently I saw VCD/DVD and I found same names.i.e Seeta and Radha.
You are right Da Vinci Code ran easily in western world but as soon as it reached in India people’s religious sentiments were hurt.
@ RK – I fundamentally oppose the title of this post!
Fundamentalists should oppose *all* cinema that they see fit, in any language, while allowing the rest of us who want to see the opposed movies to do so.
If only the world were so simple.
On a serious note, I do disagree with your idea that artists should self-censor themselves in any aspect. If an artist is creating something that upsets elements of their society, then people have the right to ignore the art, protest it, and/or demand apologies and explanations from the artist.
Historically, artists of all sorts have been the ones to tell truth to power, to show the communities that they exist in another view of the world they live in, to address the difficult questions of life, beauty, relationships, power, religion, etc.
If the artists themselves are forced to self-police themselves in the hopes that they don’t offend a segment of society, then they defeat the base element of the creative process, which is self-expression.
Artists should be allowed to push the envelope of a societies sensibilities. The society they live in will determine the boundaries (look at how the public perception of art changed in the US in the 1990s based on congressional hearings into what constitutes “art”). The artist will be celebrated, or forced to reevaluate the mediums of their message and how they convey that message.
And, while fundamentalists should be allowed to protest whatever they want, they should never be allowed to cause any harm to people or property in doing so. How does that open communication outside of their community so they can explain their views and find like minded sympathisers they may not have otherwise found?
That said, I find it distasteful when an artist tries to push boundaries for no other reason than to draw attention to themselves and their work. Controversy for the sake of itself is a waste of everyones time…
atta girl T !!!! =d> =d> =d>
@RK: Also, I don’t agree with you in that Deepa Mehta needs controversy to make a successful film – she’s far too competent a director for that. She might be guilty of not backing down, but I don’t think she courts controversy for the sake of it. I haven’t seen ‘Water’ yet, but ‘Fire’ and especially ‘1947: Earth’ are certainly two of the better movies that have come out.
t!,
I seriously think that artists like Deepa Mehta were so genuine in their efforts to wake up people from the sleep or to say against power. If it was the case Matrobhumi was not made by Manish Jha but by Deepa Mehta, first she is woman, second she basically (barring no offence to anyone) belongs to Punjab where male to female ratio is touching at shamefully alarming low ratio.
We are living in that time where people see things in segments, if an American comes to make a film on the subject that Indian killed triabls in India to make cities out of forests then people will ask him why he did not make a film on what happened to Red Indians.
If an artist is unbiased and genuine in his approach then he does not need any kind of self control because rebellions and revolutionaries dont remain selective in their doings. They protest all wrong doings. They dont do it that protest someone becasue he is not a friend and dont protest someone because he is these days in friend’s list.
We are living in the time when there is conflict between religious communities and faiths and if a person making an art based on ill things present in other’s religion which s/he does not follow then people are bound to ask cant you see first whats happening in your own religion.
Scene and everything is not as simple as think and discuss. They have much deeper meaning.
Ranjit: Neither I can say for sure whether Deepa Mehta needs controversy to make a successful film nor I can say she does not need it, This can better be said by her and her close associates only. Personally I dont know her. Film directors producers often are seen to enjoy controversies related with their films. Mahesh Bhatt is and old champion in this game. Controversy had given audience to an otherwise ordinary film “ek chhoti se love story”. Raja Bundela was found guilty in such case. I really am not sure if Deepa is in to it or away from it. If competency is the only parameter then Mahesh Bhatt is far more competent director then her (atleast till now) His only two films Arth and Saaransh are heavier in quality then any of her film. Market is different ball game where even competent needs Stunts.:)
Khusbhoo: you are right, Protesters of Fire either were not wise (if their motive was to stop or change the Film)because then they had Ram Jethamlani and Arun Jetely, like famous lawyers in their side at that time or they were too wise( as their motive was to create only noise).
As Late Dushyant once wrote:
Hangama khada karna mera maqsad nahin
meri koshish hai kee har halat mein saurate-i-haal badalna chahiye.
Perhaps their motive was just to create hangama.
I am a great fan of Ms. Mehta, and was not referring to her when I made my comment about artists creating for the sake of controversy – I have long, long, long list of American artists that came to mind when I wrote that. I should have been more clear.
And, all of your points in your comment are well taken.
Rereading my comment, I am somewhat scared of what I wrote, because religious fundamentalism scares me to no end and I didn’t know it was possible that I could ever defend it. But, then I realize that it is the right of freedom of expression that I was expressing. And, doesn’t that freedom of expression mean having the ability to explore all facets of all religions, including your own?
In a perfect world, yes. But, as you pointed out, the times we live in make this difficult. One base issue with fundamentalism is dogmatism, and when people start discussing “isms”, there is rarely any middle ground for communication, let alone an attempt at understanding another person’s (re: artist) exploration of a topic outside of themselves.
t!
you are right, religious fundamentalism is the most dangerous kind.
You and I may like it or not but world has reached at that stage where first taking care of home ground has been must before we sweep outside.
People in every society are demanding reforms but then it has become like this that what if I become more liberal and democratic, he does not do same with his religion and with more and more immigration situation is becoming worst. 100 years ago nobody could bother how Saudi Arab or Iran or Irak or Russia were running. But now with lot of interaction at world forum and where there is cut throat competition in business things have become worst. If Pakistan or Bangladesh scream in United nations that Muslims are not treated well in India then India has to pointed out what about Hindus in their country? and this is right also.
India is democratic USA is democratic but history suggests clearly that USA did not like it when someone from India went there and spoke against wrong doings in Christianity. He was incarcerated.
We humanbeing are same. Christianity and other religions are asking Islam to reform its rigid form. If some Muslim makes a film on Christian bigotry then I dont think he will be garlanded, he will be asked to take care of his own faith first. (Not talking about Documentaries because inspite of all noise nobody take them seriously).
World will naturally be better when all kind of societies come to the conclusion that lets make common grounds for daily life. Religion has to go back to barrocks as personal matter.
Artists have to suffer in this tough time but they can help society by being unbiased in their approach.
Just we saw in case of Shilpa Shetty and Big Boss. People are aware of the things happening. Indians were shown mirror that you should take care of castesim in your society, White woman Jane is reportedly making plans to visit India because her rage has put her career in danger.
So its not like this that things are not reforming. Threre is always someone to show mirror to others. none is above this phenomenon.
Only thing we all , whether below average Indians or advanced Americans, are wounded humanebings and we are compelled to take things in that manner only. atleast for some time.
@ RK on a lighter note “It was not possible fundamentalist organisations to make a counter film on
om saaley !!!! Tera sense of humor creeps into the most impossible of all situations
@om:^:)^^:)^^:)^^:)^^:)^^:)^^:)^=))=))=))=d>=d>=))=d>
“If your nation is getting fucked, impotancy has reached all time high”
so whats new in a “Dal” threatening a someone or entire movie industry with dire consequnce. it does help if the ruling government has been elected on hate-votes and a measly 1000 or so dead bodies.
we have recently discovered that T.V is meant for childerns only. And if you happen to on the wrong side of 18 then only thing you can do is to choose the next government but sorry dont get agitated if your are being treated as a second citizen. ok, you are feeling too soggy, cheer up man you have been sternly urged to go and fetch some CD’s, or innumerable porn-sites which can face ban anytime soon.
still if you find these adventures to puny for your overgrown dick, take plunge man welcome to the whore-world. of course all these are illegal
it would be interesting if someone files a PIL seeking direction to have sex with a prostitute just to find out whether he could fuck legally or i bet you would suffer premature ejaculation if you read the laws copied and pasted from victorian age.
welcome to a world where pissed out people like you and me write on blogs and thugs run the entire country.
couple of things in my wish list.
1. Insecure and highest tax-payers, film industry getting united and saying enuff is enuff of any thug targetting it to protest and get immidiate two minutes of fame. now Parzania has been banned in gujraat, so ban gujraat from film-fraternity. no movie release in gujraat.
2. through out India all prostitute on strike for a month. a clean country without pros. a hypocrate government representing hypocrate people will never have guts to legalise it. let me and the entire world see the repcurssion when our basic necessity are being deprived. i will talk about our culture then.
3. i would like all the pissed out cowards including me writing blogs to have courage of actually going on streets and giving the message loud and clear. we will decide what will our government do, we will decide what we want to see. we want to question every government employee every day about what he is doing about the money we are paying through taxes.
biggest threat to this nation is not poverty, population, outraged morality at the drop of the hat syndrome. a currupt nation etc.
the biggest threat is the Impotancy. A nation of impotant deciding to either shut our eyes or look other way as our nation is being raped every second. its not about have nots, but those who could not be enlightened with education, knowledge and vision. my consince says that i am an asshole. i will be highly satisfied with making a useless contribution to a blog pouring my bleeding thoughts to achive instant gratification.
but one sudden day you will find one chandan sharma bored to death with this useless life which has given him a lot. actually walking on the street with a banner that you protest or do whatever i do not give a fuck.
It is very disapointing. Deepa Mehta is not versatile director, so in order to create hype for her movie, she creates controversaries, which gets some amount of ‘edge’ to her movie by means of publicity, rhteroically etc. So, I feel the names given Seeta and Radha, is a deliberate stunt to seek publicity.
As far as Javed Akhtar, Shabana Azmi is concerned, undoubtedly, they have doble standards, They pose themselves ’seculars’ even javed Akhtar went to court to seek justice for victims of Gujarat riots and once n Indian Idol show, he was praising Moghul emperor Aurengzeb, well, I would like to amke you aware, why Javed Akhtar approach court when Kashmiri Pandits were murdered in 1990, why he reamiend silent when goon like M.F. Hussain obscure hindu goddess by his paitings, why he kept silemt when terrorist Afzal Guru’s executation was delayed and yet it hasn’t seen the light of the day, Mr.Akhtar thinks himself very smart but the fact is that, people are not dumb!
As far as old man dilpi Kumar si concerned, I firmly belive that, he’s like a ship who has been struck in the fog and can’t se anything,perhaps keeps blowing his horn …..
He is Indian only by name but yet his heart lies in terrorist Nation Pakistan.
@Aditya,
Re: Deepa Mehta it can be true, as she has made films considering one sided views only. But she is not Indian citizen so we may leave her alone, whatever her sensibilities are, this is her life and creative work and understanding.
Rest all are citizens of India and we have to treat them as our own parts. Mistakes are not crime. They are as essential parts of India as you are. Like you are keeping one side veiws about them in same way they also could have kept one sided veiws about a certain problem at a given time.
Not only Javed Akhtar many leftist historians praise Aurangzeb. We have to conisder in what field Javed Akhtar was prasing him. was it for simple ways of living which Aurangzeb used to follow?
Characters of history cant be sidelined with one sided approach only. as they are part of history so its easy and feasible to study their role completely. what good they did and what wrong they did. Its useless to praise or criticise them now as they dont affect our lives.
History certainly gives us understanding that we learn to study people for different roles they play at same time.
People may criticise Narendra Modi for his fundamentalistic approach but at same time he has to be analysed for brining economic prosperity to his state. His both faces are true and majority of his state walla has to decide which face they want. certainly they are the people who can control either or both of the sides of his.
Please study Dilip Saab more before you cherish such sick views about him. He does not deserve such ill views. He is man of love, endurance and wisdom.
May god bring better and liberal understanding in you as thats the only way in bringing change in others.
And its not about others its about you also. Your stubborn attitude will create more counterparts in society and your enduring existence will create similar counterparts. You have to decide which kind of people you want around you.