Film Stars as CMs! What’s wrong with the South? Or, will Chiranjeevi make a difference in AP elections?
“South has a propensity to elect film stars as their Chief Ministers.”
- TV News Anchor, circa May, 1996
“Chiranjeevi is starting a new party; remember, South has a historical tendency to vote in favor of film stars.”
- Senior Editor, prominent TV News channel, 2 weeks ago
“Yeh film stars ko vote de dete hain. Aise state ka karoge kya?”
- Overheard during a discussion on TN politics
I greeted the news of Telugu superstar Chiranjeevi starting a political party of his own with a lot of enthusiasm. I am not a registered member of his fans’ association nor do I think, unlike his fans, that he has answers to all the problems of the state of Andhra Pradesh. Also, please discount those hoary five years between ’89-’94 when I saw every Chiru movie without understanding a word. Yes, my friends, my eyes have witnessed the Jebu Donga, Manchi Donga, State Rowdy, Gang Leader, Rowdy Alludu and the ‘baap’ of them all, Gharana Mogudu. I will assure you language is absolutely no barrier to watching and enjoying these movies. But all these compelling reasons still do not account for my enthusiasm when I read the news report about the imminent start of the political party, tentatively named, ‘Jai Chiranjeeva’.
The reasons are in quotes given at the start of the article. The draw of a film star as a politician is a social phenomenon not analyzed adequately. Now that Chiru is jumping into the fray, it allows me to test a few hypotheses of mine in a real life scenario. I will come back to these hypotheses at the end of this post.
First, let me start with debunking the most common Indian views about AP and TN electing film stars as their Chief Ministers. To many Indians (with fair amount of education), this is a reflection of a kind of fanaticism that people display towards movies in these states. There is an unspoken derision about the immaturity of the people who get swayed by screen images of their stars and elect them to power. You can sense that in many armchair political conversations.
I find this quite amusing and logically inconsistent for various reasons. Why are people who have voted for film stars in Mumbai North (Sunil Dutt), New Delhi (Rajesh Khanna), Gurdaspur (Vinod Khanna) and Bhilwara (Dharmendra) not painted with the same brush? How is it that people have re-elected some of these South Indian stars over and over again, admitting that the first win was a flash in the pan? Why has no film star swayed an entire state on the basis of his star status in the North of India? Please, don’t tell me that people are politically more mature there. Why should states like AP and TN which demonstrate remarkable sagacity when it comes to planning for their growth, progressive measures for social justice and form a huge chunk of India’s soft power in software, biotech or science, betray stupidity when voting for their politicians?
There’s definitely something more to it than meets the eye.
Firstly, let’s take cinema as a medium. In most countries, cinema halls provided the first instance of “classless” social activity. If you bought a ticket, you were on par with everyone else who has a similar ticket. This is an important phenomenon to appreciate since cinema gave a sense of empowerment to the masses, hitherto, denied to them in most forms of entertainment which were clearly divided between the elites and the masses. Secondly, unlike stage and theatre, the stars of films appeared almost flawless. Nobody saw them falter or miss a line. Heck, very few even saw them in person. This lends itself to a lot of myth making.
So, the phenomenon of film stars making a strong impact on people isn’t difficult to comprehend. A recognizable face, strong oratorial skills and an instant ability to connect based on your filmography have meant that a lot of filmstars have found success at polls both within India and outside. Many of these filmstars have found to their dismay that these advantages get frittered away quite quickly unless you build upon them in terms of tangible public service. Govinda will find it the hard way in the next polls (if he is given a ticket) as have others found it before him. So, the people of Mumbai North, South Delhi, Gurdaspur et al might have voted a star once but will not get carried away unless backed by solid performance from the star.
But there have been film stars who have transcended from a one constituency appeal to a state-wide or national appeal. It’s this riddle that’s interesting to unravel. Let’s take four interesting examples that might provide us further insights.
Ronald Reagan (Republican) who served the USA as its 40th President is the most famous example of a film star’s rise to the highest office of the land. Reagan almost won the 1976 primaries against Ford and then swept the 1980 Republican primaries. However, it’s difficult to attribute Reagan’s star power to his rise in politics. In fact, Reagan was hardly in the A list of Hollywood celebrities during his acting days in the 40s (his notable claim to fame was that he was considered for the lead role of Casablanca). Reagan, therefore, went through the grind as any political aspirant within the GOP system. He had his advantages especially his superb speeches which earned him the tag of the Great Orator. Reagan came to power in 1980 defeating the incumbent President Carter and riding on a strong public desire to return to conservatism. This desire was fuelled by the high inflation in the US economy then, the Iran hostage crisis and the ongoing cold war which had almost reached its peak in 1980. Reagan, who had clearly thrown his weight with the more conservative elements of GOP, was the right man at the right time and with a gift of explaining it in simple words to the people.
Joseph Estrada was the 13th President of Philippines between ’98-’01 who came to power on back of a strong pro-poor mandate. Estrada was almost like the Amitabh Bachchan of the Filipino film industry. And his campaign managers exploited his on screen image of a do-gooder and a friend of the poor to the hilt to ensure he wins the race. Estrada, though, wasn’t an accidental politician. He had contested mayoral elections and had been the Vice President of Philippines under Fidel Ramos. He had political experience and knew how to tap into popular public sentiment. That he was a film star and had a body of work which could strengthen his message only made it easy for him. It’s a different story that he was impeached for graft and corruption and has been fighting court cases since the last 5 years. He isn’t coming back into politics in a hurry. Star power or no star power.
That brings us to the Indians in this story. Firstly, the M.G. Ramachandran (MGR) story. Tamil Nadu (or Madras state) had strong leaders of the Indian National Congress who were its CMs in its initial years, most notably, Rajaji (C.R. Rajagopalchari and not the Govinda movie of the same name) and Kamraj. There was a political vacuum in the opposition. The Self Respect movement that Periyar had started with the aim of a more egalitarian society hadn’t become a political force. It was the genius of Annadurai to broadbase that movement and link it to Dravidian identity. Many other tools came in handy especially the imposition of Hindi as the national language and the predominance of upper castes in most of the important administrative and political posts. Annadurai, a man of letters himself, realized the importance of cinema as the new medium to spread his message and he got two useful allies in his efforts – writer M Karunanidhi and the charismatic actor MGR. MGR became the face of the Dravidian movement and his films gradually came to mean more for people than mere entertainment. Anna won the ’67 elections on the Dravidian plank and when he passed away in ‘69, Karunanidhi took over as the CM with MGR as the party treasurer. By 1972, MGR had irreconcilable differences with Karunanidhi and the party and he formed the AIADMK as a Dravidian alternative to DMK. MGR swept to power in the 1977 election with his new party and never lost an election till he passed away in 1987. It is important to note that MGR was into active politics for over 2 decades before he came to power. Being the mascot of Dravidian politics (as planned by Anna) gave him the platform to create a party which people could associate with. Otherwise, there was hardly a chance for a Menon from Kerala (which MGR was) to become the most popular leader in TN. And, remarkably, MGR got his political act absolutely right blending populist measures with pragmatic economic policies. After MGR’s death, Jayalalitha took up the mantle and provides an interesting case of a film star CM who inherited a film star CM’s legacy. The abiding power of Dravidian movement has been such that since 1967, Congress hasn’t had a whiff of a chance of coming back to power in TN.
Finally, the most amazing story if it all. N. T. Rama Rao (NTR). For over 3 decades, NTR ruled the Telugu film industry with public adulation and love that were unparalleled. It’s difficult to say how political NTR was during his acting days though there were movies where he did the standard Indian film hero routine of standing up for the poor and fighting injustice which could seem political in their message. The early 80s in AP were ripe for a political change. Congress had been the ruling party for 26 straight years (since the formation of the state in 1956). Even the emergency couldn’t dislodge the Congress. There was significant discontent among masses on account of corruption and general anti-incumbency. And to top it all, there was the infamous incident at the Hyderabad airport involving Rajiv Gandhi (who was then a Gen Secretary of the party) and the then CM T Anjaiah which hurt the pride of Telugus across the state. NTR created Telugu Desam in Mar 1982 with the primary motive of restoring Telugu pride (”Aaru Kotla Andhrula Atma Gauravam” or the self respect of over six-crore people of AP). The elections were 9 months away. The masses were waiting for an option and voted with their feet in the elections of Dec 1982. The TDP had won a landslide. In fact, in the 1984 LS elections, TDP was the single largest opposition party. It almost seemed like if NTR hadn’t happened, the people would have invented him to defeat Congress in the elections. NTR’s political career also demonstrated that people don’t vote on the basis of emotions for a superstar over and over again. NTR lost the next elections in ‘89 and came back briefly for a while in ‘94. By then, NTR had lost a lot of sheen through his filmy antics of Chaitanya Rath and moving around in saffron robes et al.
What conclusions can be drawn from the above examples?
First, film stars who have risen to eminent political posts (and not one off electoral wins) have done so on the basis of a wider social and political agenda than mere star status. The star status helped in getting the people to hear them. But there were larger forces at play when they jumped into political fray and they seized their opportunity. People were voting their agenda more than their stardom.
Second, a distinct sense of identity in terms of language or shared history with the star is extremely important. NTR and MGR were the beacons for Telugu and Dravidian identity through their films especially in the face of real or imagined threats from the Hindi heartland. This is primarily the reason why the Hindi speaking belt will find it difficult to get same emotional involvement with a Hindi film star. The sense of identity or a sense of persecution which rallies people together will always be missing.
That leaves us with a few states where this phenomenon could have worked but didn’t. West Bengal had all the ingredients of a TN – a strong sense of history, pride in the culture, self sufficiency and a strong desire for an egalitarian society. It’s interesting that the Communists filled up the vacuum in the same way Dravidian parties did in TN. There was the alternative of the Bangla Congress tried with Ajoy Mukherjee and I, sometimes think, had Uttam Kumar been the face of the non-Congress alternative, we might have had a film star CM in WB as well. Punjab had a strong alternative in the Akali Dal which grabbed power in almost the same time (1967) so it didn’t need a rallying point to be created. Maharashtra film industry was overshadowed by Bombay and Gujarat and Orissa hardly had a film industry of note. They could hardly throw up a film star who could tap into public discontent.
That leaves us with two states with a distinct language and cultural identity – Karnataka and Kerala. Kerala followed the WB template with the Communists filling up the vacuum. Karnataka is an interesting case. After having been created as a state by taking portion of the erstwhile Madras, Hyderabad and Bombay Presidencies, Karnataka distinctly needed to assert its language and its own history. Cinema proved to be an ideal mass medium for doing so and they found an affable multi-talented star in Dr. Rajkumar. The reason for Dr. Rajkumar’s abiding popularity in Karnataka is the contribution he made to crystallizing the Kannadiga identity. This was actually ideal ground for a foray into politics and there’s hardly anyone in Karnataka who would dispute that Dr. Rajkumar would have become the CM had he ever decided to enter politics in life. There were offers aplenty, but he declined them all.
So the phenomenon of voting super stars to power has nothing to do with the political acumen or lack of it, of the people of these states. Unfortunately, a lot of TV news anchors possibly know as much political history of Indian states as George W Bush knows about world geography. Dismissing this phenomenon as the inability of the public to make a distinction between reel and real life is lazy journalism.
That brings us back to the Chiranjeevi question. I think Chiranjeevi’s entry into politics offers us a live social science experiment. He is as much a super star as any we have seen in the country. If the people tend to blindly vote for a super star, he should replicate NTR of 1982. My guess is he would not be able to do so. There isn’t a groundswell of public opinion that he can ride on and become a face of unlike 1982. He will definitely make an impact and swing votes especially within his community but that will be akin to a Vijaykanth like effect in the last TN polls (Chiru is a much bigger star so this is only to illustrate the point). And, of course, the final question. Will a Rajinikanth be able to do what MGR or NTR did? I would still doubt it for the same reason as above. Rajini can make an impact and change the course of an election but he might not be able to create a party to win one. I think he knows it as well which explains his gradual detachment from politics. Chiranjeevi, on the other hand, must have his reasons. I am only keen to see how it plays out. He has almost the same time as NTR had before the elections (about 9 months).
Until then, please slap the misinformed idiot (on my behalf) that makes the remark, “South mein film stars ko Chief Minister bana dete hain.” If it’s a TV News anchor, please repeat the procedure.
Tags: Subrat, Unwanted Gyaan
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
The change what they have bought in the society is tremendous.MGR and NTR have revolutionized the politics in the South.In fact the growth has been unbelievable–YES unbelievable.Every Southern State has been recognized for its own achievements.
–Cities like Bangalore,Hyderabad,Mysore,Chennai etc.. are the IT Hubs of India.
–If you look at the literacy rate the Southern states are ahead of other states in the country.
–The 33% Reservation for women in Engineering and Medical Colleges is Andhra Pradesh is one of the greatest achievement.
–The Southern states have recorded less %age of Human Rights Violations.
–The GDP growth in Southern states is higher,they stand after “Gujarat” and Maharashtra.
–Women in Southern states are highly educated than the other areas.
The above mentioned points are just to showcase the quality of South India and not to degrade anyone.
Coming to the Film stars entry into Politics,i feel that it is due to their participation in the Politics we have seen the change.
There are some F…..g news channels which doesn’t know the ground reality and try to portray the issue in the way they like.I hope Chiranjeevi entry would make an impact on AP politics as AP needs a third alternative or at least a Coalition Government.
prof saab…
aap chhaaa rahe ho!!
one helicopter goes down and with it Carters hope of relection
par notable omission AB’s political journey..
or mebe u were focused only on CMs?!!
Intreating article. Very informative. I’m sure many readers wouldn’t have known the political history that you have described. This adds to the diversity on this site.
Abey….Chiranjeevi on any day is a better choice than Mayawati or even Uma Bharti…so purely from a perspective of relativity…South is doing better than North while electing leaders.
Very good thought. We need to educate these so called intellectual TV channel owners to come to grass root and then speak. They churn out all their hypothesis sitting in AC rooms in New Delhi or Mumbai.
Keshav
as sanjay said… it was indeed an informative and an interesting read
.
BREAKING NEWS!
Chiranjeevi has just announced his cabinet if he wins.
Deputy Chief Minister: Allu Aravind
Home & Youth Affairs: Pawan Kalyan
Finance & Revenue: Nagendra Babu
Labour & Employment: Allu Arjun
Forest,Environment,Science and MMS Technology: Trisha Krishnan
Rural Water Supply: Roja
Smallscale Industries and Khadi & Village Industries Board: Dasari Narayanrao
Minister for Excise and Prohibition: Kota Srinivas rao
Minister for Transport: Brahmanandam
Minister for Major Irrigation and Medium Irrigation: Simran
Minister For Cooperation: Shakeela
When a school teacher or a businessman can foray into politics then what is wrong with movie stars?? They are also an integral part of our society and country..
by d way George Bush’s geography will definitely be better than Indian journalists’ knowledge of politics..
along with the slaps recommended from Subrat also paste a line on their foreheads- “ye news wale bhi kisi copy paste wale ko repoter bana dete hain”
A delightfully well researched article Subrat. Congrats, you are a voice of sanity
Subrat!!
OM or ravptor can explain more about the story of Kapus and chiranjeevi as their most well known face in Andhra – the reason for his foray into politics. Chiranjeevi is not as naive to think that he wil lmake it big because he is a film star and darling of masses – He has a good chunk of Kapus backing him up and could do better than what Vijyknth did in TN.
a very very very informative and researched article !!!
Professor Saab … Superb ..maza aa gaya …
and yeah i would hope that some time u wld also write about AB’s Political sojourns so that us (who havent read much about his political journey) would be enlightened
very informative sir….
i guess now i get it why they call u professor
Excellent work Subrat – one of the best pieces I’ve read here. And you’re spot on with your analysis. The reason why Amma continues to have a solid voter base in TN is the fact that she’s actually delivered on a lot of her electoral promises over the years.
Unlike a lot of folks in Hindi films (Sunil Dutt being a very honourable exception), in TN and AP, when film stars take a plunge in politics, they do it to become serious, full-time politicians. Politics isn’t a side hobby to keep them busy while they continue trying to wrangle roles in movies.
Subbu Sir, all I can say is this: These guys have worked hard to be at the top of their profession. NTR, Chiru… am sure MGR and Amma; also as they are more visible, people in andhra tend to vote for them.
Also for the fact that NTR and Chiru have worked for the masses, no doubt about it. Did they profit from it, like any other public venture, yes they did.
Nice article sir but the sensibilities of the south at some level i feel are like the sensibilities of the west… the leaders need to be lofty and portray at some level an image of being better than the normal people.
Will Chiru win and become CM – my father had this thumb rule that if in the center there is Congress, AP replicates it…
26 yrs, 26 yrs; janata party – Telugu Desam; NDA – Naidu…
Manmohan – YSR; So Andhra’s tend to vote national and regional – that film-stars were elected is but a general trend.
In Andhra, we are facing the most divisive political situation ever. Its 4 ways bascially and no one will win a majority; like the country itself.
But if Chiru ties up with Naidu… they will get power and if what I get from speaking with other telugu’s is correct – Naidu is looking for a role in the center than in AP so he might as well support Chiru to the CM post.
All said and done, Chiru still does not have the capability to win the state – kapus, no kapus. But a lot of money will change hands a lot of fresh money will pour into the industry.
This sure sounds and reads like a PhD thesis. what an analysis! great job. the first article out here that I would want to forward to a lot of people. 5/5
Wah wah wah…subbu sir…brilliantly informative article…damn exhaustive…loved it…
me keep away from politics..but, i just couldnt help myself from not reading this…loved it
The only problem i see is…why are people deciding to vote for Chiru..when he hasnt even come out with his manifesto? I am not for him not joining politics..i feel anyone who feels he can do any good should give it a shot.
I only hope he doesnt bring in agendas of 2 rupee rice scheme..or more reservations..its already close to 87%..AP doesnt need more…
Lekin the way you explained it..it couldnt have gotten better…janta pagal nahi hain :-)
Thanks for the comments everyone.
KK: on AB’s politics, I think we should make a request to RK for a piece
VPJ: The uniform-clad fans of Captain are an equal match for all Kapu votes of Chiru. What say?
PJ for the morning: what’s Chiru’s morning beverage? ans: “kapu-chino”
Machchar: ha, ha, ha
Ravptor: I still think it’s going to be 2 horse race. TRS, Chiru, BJP et al will play supporting roles. It will be interesting to see how Telangana votes
OM: Chiru has come up with an outline of his policies. Pro poor, pro environment etc but the irony is he started with an office in Banjara Hills. Anyway, I think Aug 22 is his b’day and he will formally jump in. So we will have the answers in a few days.
U cannot just like that say….”Film Stars as CMs! What’s wrong with the South?”…..cause people like MGR eventhough he is Film actor he worked with karuna and also attended many meetings with Anna(The founder of DMK and AIADMK)even while he was acting in the films……TN did not have a good CM after the exit of MGR……So one can’t dislodge film stars from becoming CM just for the simple reason that they are acting in films…..I accept if they aspire for CM post without any political experience we should dislodge them…..I strongly condemn vague statements like this…..
@ S.Ramakrishnan –
Did you even read the post? If so, please read it and then comment.
Dabba, the philanthrope, a round of Chimay on me next time
great article subrat..I also feel that Chiranjeevi won’t be able to make much of an impact.In fact YSR must be a happy man since Chiranjeevi will definitely split TDP votes which will benefit congress..
Great post..but misleading title.. I felt the same way as S.Ramakrishnan but after reading the post I felt it was a balanced one.
I wonder what might had made chiru to take this step to enter politics …
@ Subrat –
Why so tightpursed?
@ #22 Anand –
In the age of media blitzkreiging, and tabloid headlines, one has to resort to such tactics to get people to listen. Hopefully, once the person comes in, they are able to calm down and read the content, and have a discussion.
yes i think chiru will bring changes, as per my concern i don’t think there is any thing bad abt present ysr govt even chandrababu is also good, even chiru as said samething in pressmeet.
onething is true chiru is good at heart and he is good at serve to ppl, but onething is ysr is very strong in winning the next election, may i think it’s difficult to chiru to be CM
nice article. debunks several myths. One diff with Chiru compared to many other star turned politicians is his social work much before the present day foray. He has been active with his blood/eye bank in Andhra and has created a considerable change in mental make up of a lot of people – for almost 10 yrs now.
We all wish he does bring in a sea of change w.r.t governance. Many of us also wish he allies with Jaya prakash narayan, another idealist ex-IAS politician.
everytime u do this yeoman’s service of enlightening us with some issue or the other…i think Chiru won’t be able to do MGR or NTR because the myth creating era and aura are not there..with 24×7 media coverage one can’t just have the unblemished and holier-than-thou or messaihlike image anymore..And there goes the sheen that can blind the masses to one’s warts et al..Yes u have a point that its not the star’s political acumen that makes them political heavyweights but combination of many other forces–riding the swell at the right time being the foremost..but a very informative post indeed subrat.
people are voting to some leader, just becouse he is meber of xyz party.
we dont know that person at all.. and everyone know.. what kind of rowdies get tickets in current parties..
in such case.. why not to vote for some one we know for 25 years….
voting to chiranjeevi is much better choice then voting political rowdies.