Naunihaal(1967) : Pain of India, after losing Pt. Nehru !
———————————————————
“Time is not measured by the passing of years but by what one does, what one feels, and what one achieves.”
———————————————————
“Peace is not a relationship of nations. It is a condition of mind brought about by a serenity of soul. Peace is not merely the absence of war. It is also a state of mind. Lasting peace can come only to peaceful people.”
——————————————————–
“Life is like a game of cards. The hand you are dealt is determinism; the way you play it is free will.”
——————————————————–
- Pt. Nehru
The emotion of sadness of people of India which they had got from the death of Pt Nehru has been described very well in a 1967 hindi film Naunihaal.
Can’t recall the full story of the film, seen on DD long ago. All I can recall is the story of a child, facing many difficulties in life and he has a desire to meet Pt Nehru and somehow its arranged and Balraj Sahni has to take the child to Delhi.
Child is happy but after reaching Delhi Balraj Sahni listens the news of Pt Nehru’s death. With his death Child’s dream of meeting Chacha Nehru is shattered.
I faintly remember Sanjiv Kumar and Indrani Mukharjee also but memory does not support any strong scene which could be mentioned.
Film has used real footage of Nehru’s funeral procession. With the golden voice of Mohd. Rafi singing, Meri Avaaj Suno, the memorable words of Kaifi Azmi, climax of this film has become very impressive. Climax has caught the sad feelings of a person/country facing the situations of being a newly orphaned one.
Meri avaaj suno song composed by Madan Mohan,pays tribute to Nehru.
Kafi Azmi has given a handsome tribute to Nehru through this song.
Meri Aavaaz Suno, Pyaar Ke Raaz Suno
Maine Ek Phuul Jo Siine Pe Sajaa Rakhaa Tha
Usake Parade Main Tumhe Dil Se Lagaa Rakhha Tha
Tha Judaa Sabase Mere Ishq Ka Andaaz SunoZindagii Bhar Mujhe Nafarat Si Rahi Ashkon Se
Mere Khvaabon Ko Tum Ashkon Mein Dubote Kyon Ho
Jo Meri Tarah Jiyaa Karate Hain Kab Marate Hain
Thak Gayaa Huun Mujhe So Lene Do Rote Kyon Ho
So Ke Bhi Jaagate Hii Rahate Hain Jaanbaaz Suno …
Meri Duniya Mein Na Purab Hai Na PashChim Koi
Saare Insaan Simat Aaye Khulii Baahon Mein
Kal Bhatakataa Tha Main Jin Rahon Main Tanhaa Tanhaa
Kaafile Kitane Mile Aaj Unhiin Rahon Main
Aur Sab Nikale Mere Hamadard Mere Hamaraz Suno …Naunihaal Aate Hain Arathii Ko Kinaare Kar Lo
Main Jahaan Tha Inhen Jaanaa Hai Vahaan Se Aage
Aasamaan Inakaa Zamiin Inakii Zamaanaa Inakaa
Hain Kai Inake Jahaan Mere Jahaan Se Aage
Inhen Kaliyaan Na Kaho Hain Ye Chamanasaaz Suno …Kyon Sanvarii Hai Ye Chandan Kii Chitaa Mere Liye
Main Koi Jism Nahiin Huun Ke Jalaaoge Mujhe
Raakh Ke Saath Bikhar Jaauungaa Main Duniya MeiN
Tum Jahaan Khaaoge Thokar Vahiin Paaoge Mujhe
Har Kadam Par Hai Naye Mod Ka Aagaaz Suno …
Film has another song in the voice of Rafi.
Tumharee julf ke saye mein shaam kar lunga
Rendition of Rafi to the words “ Kar lunga”. reminds one of very good non-filmi ghazal of Rafi.
Kitani rahat hai Dil tut jane ke baad.
Film is a good tribute to Nehru and represents the sorrow of people of India and exhibits the void created by absence of Nehru.
* * * * * *
It has become fashion for present days non-congressi politicians (obviously to fullil their vested interests), biased and politically motivated authors and critics (to appease their political masters) and ignorant people who never have read anything genuine written about Nehru, or written by Nehru, to put allegations on Nehru for any wrong things happened in India after 1947.
There is no process in the world which has 100% of both the yield and selectivity. We have to see the optimum rate of any process and its valid in any case be it abstractive in nature or subjective.
An alive person has to pass through many failures in his life and so many times decisions go wrong. No person is 100% perfect and Pt Nehru was also not an exception to this fact. If he took 100 decisions for India then its natural and quite possible that 15-20 decisions did not bring desired results for India and people of India.
This is absurd and utterly foolish and if not then absolutely biased and injustified on parts of present days leaders and critics who blame Nehru for every/some wrong things because Nehru had died in 1964 and 44 years have passed since then and its sufficiently long period for any capable nation to correct the mistakes. An able country and capable citizens don’t sleep over mistakes done in the past. They either take necessary measures to rectify the situations or see ahead but they dont repeat same things again and again and if they repeat allegations only and do nothing then their repetition is nothing but an attempt to conceal their own incapabilities.
Many times groups of non-congress parties and politicians have been in power after emergency and if still leaders have to blame Nehru then its nothing but their own incapability to do something concrete for the nation. They can not raise their status to the height of Nehru so they follow the another cheap trend and try to bring Nehru down so that he also could look like them.
Naunihaals of 60s are now more than 40 years old and they should consider how many mistakes they have made in life and how many mistakes they still make on daily basis.
Mere majhi pe na ja mere gunahon ko na gin
Kaun hai jisse kabhi bhul na ho patee hai [ Madan Pal]
A person can not be dismissed for his few shortcomings only and which are nothing before his good characteristics. And we are dealing with a great leader Jawahar Lal Nehru, who handled India during most difficult and formative years of democratic India. A good civilization pays attention to person’s good deeds and analyse his mistakes for the betterment of present generation.
Just after the independence in 1947, people were living with high hopes and idealism was very much part of the lives of millions of people and they really had hoped that democracy and good people will change the fate of this nation, that was brutally raped by foreigners for centuries.
Its said that in the later years of 1950s, an article was published in the newspapers to criticise Prime Minister Pt Nehru.
Article cautioned people of India about the Nehru’s autocratic nature and warned people before they elect Nehru for the third consecutive term as it would inflate his ego. There were other criticisms of Pt Nehru and his policies. The name of the author published with the article was Chanakya. Later after years it became known to people that Chanakya was none other than Nehru himself who had followed the path of self criticism.
By and large people had maintained the hope with Nehru and his dreams till China attacked India and its quite natural that with such events many people were angry with the biggest leader of that time. People started becoming disillusioned with Nehru’s policies but were they angry with Nehru on personal basis? History of India suggests that people have always demanded reforms in the leader and they never have demanded leader’s end or complete absence from their sights.
[Its funny that presently few political leaders and people who criticise Nehru for showing liberal attitude towards China but they themselves dont have guts to face China even after becoming nuclear power. Right under their nose China is claiming its right over a bigger part of India but these leaders are busy in watching Olympic torch's procession, having a remote (which normally has a seal of "Made in China") control in their hands ]
And Nehru fell sick in early 60s. He died subsequently and his death was death of a mass based, hugely popular leader. An old man who was an elder member of families of Millions of Indians was died on 27th of May in 1964. Patriarch of the socio-political life of India was died. People loved him. People admired him. People criticised him in later years but they had loved him from bottom of their heart and they had respected him to a great extent.
People were shocked to listen the news of his death through radio. He was sick and had got attack of paralysis and people knew he would die one day but then he was an essential part of their lives. His death created void in lives of people.
This was the second occasion to witness mass sorrow, after the killing of Gandhi ji.
Shops including restaurant were closed in almost all of India. People did not cook food at their homes.
Men of all ages were seen weeping in public places and if they could not cry in open they cried in their solitude at their homes. Teachers told this news to children in their class with eyes full of tears. People felt safe in his presence and now he was gone leaving them in political destitute. It may look soapy today but ask people of fathers and grand father’s generation to know the truth.
It was the India of 1960s, where major population had left eating dinner for days and months because her PM Lal Bahadur Shashtri had appealed to the nation to do so.
Even resturants used to put off their stoves in the evening. People were connected with the feeling of a NATION then.
An era was ended that day on 27th May of 1964. India has history of connecting with public heros. Literature is full of such descriptions. Ramayana and Ram Charit Manas both describe the sad conditions of people of Ayodhya when Ram, Laxman and Sita are going to forest for 14 years. They are leaving the Ayodhaya and crowd of people is going behind him, crying.
Gandhi’s assassination had left India in such a devastated state and his funeral had seen an unprecedented crowd of people showing their sorrows.
People’s anger with Nehru was vanished within a few seconds only, after listenting the news of his death. With whom they could have been angry now? Their beloved leader, with whom they had been keeping high expectations, about whom they had been thinking that he was a magician, who could solve every single problem of a complex society like India, was dead now. Anger turned in to sorrow and sorrow came out via tears.
Nehru’s funeral also saw a large number of people exhibiting their emotions in open. Literate, illiterate, old, young, children, man, woman, rich, poor, everybody who could connect with him was extremely sad.
If that old lady, who had slapped Nehru in 1947 after the riots in Delhi, was alive by then she would have cried a lot after knowing about Nehru’s death because where she could have found PM of such a big nation, bending before her after getting a slap and apologising for wrong deeds of rioters.
After Nehru, India has seen many PMs namely Lal Bahadur Shashtri, Nanda (Acting PM), Indira Gandhi, Morarji Desai, Charan Singh, Rajiv Gandhi, VP Singh, Chandrashekhar, Narsimha Rao, Devegoda, IK Gujral, Atal Vajpai and ManMohan Singh but none has matched with the Charisma of Pt Nehru. None has become the mass based leader as Nehru was.
With all his weaknesses, he still remains the best Prime minister, India has got till now.
Nehru’s famous Tryst with destiny speech
Nehru was a great and visonary leader, thinker, poet, writer, statesman and various aspects of his illustrious life provide material for many biopics.
Filed Under
Movies, People, Thoughts , Atal Vajpai, Balraj Sahni, Chandrashekhar, Charan Singh, Devegoda, Gandhi, IK Gujral, Indira Gandhi, Indrani Mukharjee, Lal Bahadur Shashtri, Manmohan Singh, Mohd. Rafi, Morarji Desai, Nanda, Narsimha Rao, Naunihaal, Pt Nehru, Rajiv Gandhi, Sanjiv Kumar, VP Singh
Loading ...
14 Responses to “Naunihaal(1967) : Pain of India, after losing Pt. Nehru !”
Leave a Reply
(Ref smilies)
Our Comments Policy : The following kinds of comments are troll capped, blocked and/or commenter's identity reported publicly: Verbal abuse, personal attacks, hate statements, spam, trolls, advertising. Please assist us in keeping the comments clean. Use the contact form to let us know if you find unwarranted comments on PFC. Thank you.
-
Advertisement
-
- Sorry Bhai R
- Irresponsible medium:Shame on me to be an aud
- Oye Dibakar, Dibakar
- I’m mad as hell and I won’t take it any
- Oye Lucky! Lucky Oye! Reviews from re
- The assault on our intelligence, no pun intended
- Catherine Deneuve in India - Win World Cinema DVDs
- OLLO is an incredible study of human character
- Who Is This Terrorist?? An answer
- Oye Lucky! Lucky Oye! Reviews from readers
-
Advertisement
Hottest Today:
Recent Posts:
Brilliant piece! (though a bit high on scenes describing emotion.)
Nehru was indeed the best Prime Minister we ever got, and that too, at a time when we needed the best. It’s unfortunate that trashing Gandhi and Nehru, and “wishing” that Sardar Patel should’ve been our first PM have become fashionable among people with limited or no knowledge about the times or people they are talking about.
Troubled times need more of faith than strategy to come through, and faith needs a ’superhero’, a face everybody connects with. And that was the power of Nehru and Gandhi….
Naunihaal’s story gives a good reality check for today’s times. Would we have a kid, anywhere in India, who would want to see or meet Manmohan Singh? Nah.
And that’s the tragedy.
RK - this was a different one indeed. Naunihaal as a pretext to discuss Nehru. Quite nice.
Nehru is one political leader who keeps getting reassessed eevry decade. We have a more balanced approach to critiquing him than Gandhi who is mostly deified. Nehru was a pragmatist politician and though we might question a lot of his policies (esp economic and foreign), there’s no doubt that stewarding a large, hetrogeneous nation like India through the first two decades needed a person like him. And there’s no questioning his democratic and secular credentials which laid the foundation for the modern Indian state
great article…
Political article ,totally unjustified as to what it is doing in PFC ,the film Naunihaal was just a pretext to glorify Nehru here ,many people in India hold grudges against Nehru and for good reasons too ,I will refrain from making any more comments since it will turn this forum into a political battle ground.
good read. Naunihaal should have been given more space.
@Varun (1),
Thats true, barring our former President Dr APJ Abdul Kalaam, no contemporary politician has tried to connect with the children of the nation. They have been more busy in seeking votes and alluring voters and that has been keeping them busy with people having age more than 18 years.
In many ways Dr Kalaam followed path of Nehru.
This is very unfortunate for India that in last 20 years or so we have not got any political leader who could appeal to whole of the nation. We have got leaders with limited appeal to certain regions only.
Naunihaal reprsents the hopes of a kid from his/her nation/leader. It was fortunate time that children kept expectations from leaders and remembered them and knew them. Now we can find kids not even knowing name of last few PMs. PM is not only political leader but social leader also. Some PMs who used to have walk in public gardens before, made distance from people after becoming PM under the excuse of their safety. They forgot the principle of by the people and for the people.
Nehru has been a role model for being a leader of a nation. Everybody has shortcomings so he also had but even with those shortcomings he was people’s leader and thats required in complex and hetrogenous country like India.
This is result of shallow party politics that Dr Kalam has been sidelined.
In such crucial times when India could grow faster if we had a council of able people taking care of their expertised areas.
This thinking that I (and mine group is) am the best patriot and only I can serve the nation in a better way is the biggest disease making India suffer.
And media is playing the role of Manthara while it should have played the role of Vashishtha.
Bitter truth.
@Subrat(2),
if we know our present days limitations and accept happily our modern progress because we cant present a better option then we have to apply same philosophy to past times and leaders also. reading your comments few things come in to my mind.
Gandhi did not serve as part of any government and he is seen as social reformer, ideologist and thinker and policy maker of simple but bigger things which could affect day to day life of a man. Gandhi is above the governments hence if we see him deified then it had to happen and it has happened. Gandhi is a face with which one can connect individually. When one is suffering from oppression and he has to gather strength and protest then Gandhi comes in to the picture and there Nehru will not enter. Gandhi has been dissolved everywhere and though politicians often garland his statues but on a collective basis they dont accept him because thats too dangerous for them.
but when they are individuals and have come at that stage where they have to fight against some evil, social or personal and they want to do struggle against something then they bring out Gandhi, though mostly for the sake of personal gain also. You may recall VP Singh’s political struggle during Bofors time. He had resigned from Haridwar or he was expelled when he was there (both events happened at same time) and he went to Banaras and left clothes and opted a dhoti and his topless photos while weaving on Charkha were published in newspapers.
“Raja nahin fakir hai
desh ki taqdir hai”
was his slogan. He tried to ape Gandhian ways but only to get the power.
EX IAS DS Rawat when protested against the system then he followed Gandhian way fasting outside the assembly of UP. He did not follow any other leader of freedom struggle.
Rang de basanti kind of endings are absolute No No for anyone who has a mind and is part of society. naxalites like people go other way and it has been seen in 99% case that these armed rebels first boast on voicing against oppression of poor and helpless by powerful and rich people but later these rebels themselves become tyrants and cynicals and anyone against their ways is an enemy for them. No acceptance/bearance of opposite views.
—–
Nehru was responsible for governance in India in the initial years of formation of democratic India and there were many big leaders at that time who also had particiapted in freedom struggle and many were having grudges against Nehru since begining. Humans cant rise above this. But problem before them was the huge popularity of Nehru among people. We dont need to read books and books to go in to the deatil. In democracy if one is very capable and he thinks he can carry people with him then he could have done it. Its not that big names remained with Nehru after 1950. Many made different political parties but they could not get people’s support. Its not fault of Nehru then.
When we talk about economic policies of Nehru then we only criticise but never present alternative things which could have worked better for India. Its rather more funny to find people afraid of Gandhi’s simple economical strategies so that very poor people could be benefitted and there Nehru is praised and when question of Nehru as an individual comes people criticise him. But where is the alternative model which could have worked better for all?
Party made by united front of old kings and princes could have brought economic prosperity to India in those years? They were still ready to sit on Millions and billions of Rupees without doing anything for their states. Many still have court cases to earn single ownership of huge properties.
Communist parties could have given some better solution? All communist countries of those times have been economically ruined. Exception is China but China remained communist only politically and economically it opted capitalism from 1976-77 onwards.
Jansangh or Hindu mahasabha kind of parties and group could have given us a better economic model? They never had any.
Slogan does not mean speaker is doer also.
—-
We are now discussing things happened 60 years before and we have benefit to see things from different angles.
Indian industrialists were very happy in 1950s because govt. had invested heavily in PSUs as they themselves were unable to errect so huge infrastructures and govt. made raw materials for them in these PSUs and they made finished products in their plants.
Industrialists know only one code of business conduct and that is the profit. Big Industrial groups were happy with controled policies because then no new players were there to challenge their market positions.
But situation is never same and by the 1980 when it had become clear that govt. could not waste energy, resources and money in doing business and PSUs had started suffering from trade union’s highhandedness and lazyness and tendency to focus more on rights than responsibilities and Govt was ready to open market then same big Industrial groups had protested the govt.’s first step of liberalisation.
Please have a look in to the events happened with Swaraj Paul’s investment in Indian Industry and how old Industrialists played foul. That foolish step postponed liberalisation for another 10-15 years. These years are the difference between India and China’s progress. Only better english speaking abilities can’t fill this gap.
Industralists took swift turn and now they started accusing PSUs for slow progress and started demanding privatisation of everything, (as if completely private sectors have been giving quality?- what about small sectors always owned by private sectors like hair cutting saloons, small shops etc.-did they always give best quality because they had liberty to own their business? and competition was always there but did it always give us quality?)
Foreign collaboration became talk of the time and every group followed this. But was it based on any model?
Do we have complete truth with us in any area or do we know maximum facts?
People ridiculed that India was producing only one car Ambassador. and when we have 100s of different cars in the market, we may find so many people prasing same ambassador for its strength and capacity to go anywhere on any kind of roads and in any kind of weather.
So point is we have limited knowledge at a given time but we are always curious to declare something as completely bad or completely good. Today it will be fine if we can get facilities of modern generation of cars and strength of Ambassador. SUV may be helpless in interriors in rural areas where we dont have even brick roads.
5o years after Nehru’s time,we are not able to bring best economic policy for India which could lift its economical status and all people of India could get benefits to some extent?
We have internationally reputed brains working on economic policies but results are restricted to a limited number of people only. We dont have any panecea like solution and we are happy in accepting this limitation of ours and economic leaders walk with inflated chest that we have obtained 7% or 8% growth rate.
We did not even know that on the name of green revolution we wre poisoning our fields and today major portion of fields have turned in to barron land or poisoneous lands. We ( our agriculture scientists) did not know Eucalyptus was hazardous for Indian soil and we planted them on mass level.
We did not know that developed nation always mix organic or bio fertilizer with required chemical fertilizers to their soil but we forced our less knowing farmers to reject dung based fertilizer and use Urea, super phosphate and this and that and it was like drinking neat liquor. Farmers, who were having reservations and who could see from practical eyes that chemical fertilizers were affecting their land, were ridiculed.
I am all for criticism when we have something optional to present as an alternative.
and we have to understand that its even difficult to arrange finances for a web portal. all our economic policies may become theoretical there.
@Rahul,
Thanks for your kind comment
@Vinnet(4)
Nehru is not fighting any election.
No comment on rest of your comments.
@Shailesh(5)
Thanks for your comment.
I could not recall much. Climax was very much alive in my memmory. major turning point of the film was there in mind.
I will be happy if somebody, who has seen it and can recall it, write some details about the film.
@RK
politics isn’t confined to the living ,the dead too carry this burden.
more later ,busy right now.
@Vineet,
Surely Vinnet, we have heard that mara hathi bhee sawa lakh ka hota hai.
But politics can not be done on a person died in 1964 in a nation where half of the population was not even born.
Majority of voters belonging to the age bracket of 18-25-28, can not be allured by glorifying Nehru, as you fear. Many even dont know him except his name and information relevant to GK, that he was first PM of India. Nehru does not fetch votes as name of Ambedkar or Pariyar etc can fetch. Nehru can be analysed only. He has come out of vote bank circus.
Name of Bhagat Singh can not polarise the votes. Though politics can polarise votes/voters on the name of Neta Ji Subhash Bose but that only in Bengal and not on national basis. There remains no such thing as hard core congressi voters so Nehru is not useful as he used to in the past.
Take your time to express your views. No hurry.
Hope facts prevail.
Nice write-up. I haven’t watched the movie, but your comments about Nehru are apt. I share your opinion and concern that Nehru’s legacy is really underestimated and undervalued by the current generation. I wrote about our Love-Hate ralationship with Nehru sometime ago on my blog (link below). I would love your comments/thoughts on that.
Vishal
http://vishal12.wordpress.com/2008/03/16/love-to-hate-nehru/
@Vishal,
Thanks for your comment. Sorry for responding late. saw your comment today.
Major problems come when politicians, political parties criticsing Gandhi or Nehru for small mistakes they did or done by them because then they were not seen as mistakes rather necessary steps taken against all difficulties but at the same time these politicians and political parties and their propaganda machinery shamelessly expect and demand blind eyes from todays people toward their own doing in prseent time. here they say we are compelled to take this route and people should not criticise us and they should ignore our weaknesses and mistakes as people had done with leaders of past era. Why?
Best critic is the one who criticises in present time seeing all sides of a doing.
and though for younger generation its immaterial whether they praise or criticise Gandhi and Nehru because both are dead now and cant help them in real but if praise and criticism is not based on any sane analysis then this tendency is harmful for their own life and not for reputation of Gandhi and Nehru. They are our ancestors and we have to accept them as past of our civilization and who guided older generation many years ago. If young generation does not develop an analytical understanding then its their harm and weakness. Present leaders should be judged by earning a better understanding from the past and historical leaders.
Otherwise we all are living in a vicious circle. sometimes this party and sometimes that party and result is nill, —dhak ke teen paat.
Read your blog. nicely written and pragmatic thoughts.
Thanks for lending here. hope you visit regulalrly and decorate the place with your wise comments.