Bollywood superstar Amitabh Bachchan has formally agreed to become the brand ambassador. Bachchan will participate in the development of Gujarat. He will use his image worldwide to promote tourism. Chief minister Narendra Modi in a letter to Bachchan has welcomed the actor’s decision.
Mr Bachchan was the brand ambassador of Uttar Pradesh. Ever since Amar Singh’s fallout with Mulayam Singh Yadav, it was understood that the Bachchans would not stick around. However, he ought not to have been in such a hurry. Gujarat has been flaunting its economic progress; it has done well for itself. So, obviously, it isn’t that everything was in the doldrums and they needed a superstar.
Mr B’s relationship and exposure to Gujarat is limited. I can hear the voices saying, he is an Indian and the best representative. True. But tourists are not going to flock to the state because of him. To make it worse, he had this to say:
“I do not agree with anyone who calls me shahenshah. This title is more apt for Modi; I am nowhere close.”
And, as a citizen of the country, he ought to realise that the Modi regime has been harsh on the industry from which he earns his livelihood. He may not protest when their films are banned, but the least he can do is not help out an establishment whose human rights record is abysmal.
This is complete obeisance, typical Bachchan fake humility. Only in this case, it sends out a different message. He owes it to the people of the nation. I doubt whether we’ll hear much against this, and if you do it will be couched in sober words.
Mr Amitabh Bachchan has conveniently sold out to the best possible hope for him at the moment. Mr Bachchan has acted irresponsibly in doing so.
- - -
How stupid it all is. This Marathi maanus versus the rest of the country. I have said it before that the RSS will not support the Shiv Sena stance because the saffron lot depends on the northern belt. So, no surprises about the BJP’s position.
However, they have smartly – and wrongly – invoked Article 370 to define the Sena attitude to that prevalent in Jammu and Kashmir. One has to do with sovereignty; the other prejudice. One has got a historical reason, however fissiparous it has turned out to be; the other is simply to keep out immigrants from within. Article 370 does not talk about kashmiriat; the Sena idea is about Marathi maanus.
Is the opposition to this strong, or even sensible, enough? No. Here is what Rahul Gandhi has said:
“North Indians (NSG) saved Mumbaikars during 26/11. If terror has to be fought, let Biharis stay in.”
This is ridiculous. Is he trying to say that the NSG specifically employs only North Indians? How many Mumbaikars were saved? What about the times they were not saved? Since when have Biharis become the force against terror? Is this about terrorism at all?
Sheer poppycock is passing for politics, which is bad enough on its own.
All that has to be done is throw the Constitution on the face of the Shiv Sena or drag the party to court. No Opposition party will dare do that because they are thinking about the future, about coalitions, about feeding their own vote banks.
Farzana,
ReplyDeleteA short "blast from the past" on Modi. Vijay Tendulkar had a much different opinion about Modi (A sampled news article from Indian Express is here at : http://www.expressindia.com/latest-news/Vijay-Tendulkar-The-man-who-wanted-to-shoot-Modi/311707/ ).
Tendulkar , later, sorta kinda retracted on the voilent outburst but still maintained strong emotions towards Modi. Amitabh's opportunism and Tendulkar's extreme outburst aside, the popular culture artistdom has maintained a very very convenient silence about Gujarat (Parzania being a honourable exception). As a sharp contrast, Mumbai Riots saw so many reflections in popular culture (Mani Ratnam's "Bombay", "Hum Beherampada me rehte hai", "Salim Langde Pe Mat Ro", et al. Even Anurag Kashyap's "Black Friday" subtly articulates the helpless situation of muslims in mumbai as a pre-cursor to the Bomb Blasts).
IMO, Gujarati theatre from the contemporary period too has failed to register a protest against Genocide. Whose Culture are we talking about here ? Hope my comment instigates and provokes enough reactions and perspectives.
Cheers,
Mahesh.
P.S.: On the Shiv Sena / MNS thing ... again harping back to (late) Vijay Tendulkar. About three years back, when quizzed about the MNS andolan , Tendulkar's reply was - "what if americans stage a similar agitation against marathis " ? Hoping rather hopelessly, the Boston and other "Marathi Mandals" are listening and being sensitive enough to the plight and issue of / due to immigrants.
Hi FV ( after a long time)!
ReplyDeleteThe Bachchan family is most opportunistic and greedy. Now that friend Amar Singh is booted out of SP and wife Jaya is throwing her lot with Amar, Amitabh is cosing up to Modi to ensure her political career. I am sure if Jaya is also expelled she will soon join BJP, to get that RS berth. You see it helps if one member of the family is an MP ( without fighting elections and all). And this cosying up happened before Jaya officially came out in support of AS. They do get their timings right. And thanks to his acting skills, AB can still carry on the pretention of being an upright and honourable man in the eyes of our bollywood crazy public.
Mahesh:
ReplyDeleteInteresting.
the popular culture artistdom has maintained a very very convenient silence about Gujarat (Parzania being a honourable exception). As a sharp contrast, Mumbai Riots saw so many reflections in popular culture (Mani Ratnam's "Bombay", "Hum Beherampada me rehte hai", "Salim Langde Pe Mat Ro", et al. Even Anurag Kashyap's "Black Friday" subtly articulates the helpless situation of muslims in mumbai as a pre-cursor to the Bomb Blasts).
The latter two films on the Bombay riots do not constitute popular culture, and Ratnam’s movie had its share of stereotypes. One reason that there is silence on Gujarat (what about ‘Firaaq’?) is that there is an established system and leader; the same was not true of Mumbai because it became a national movement.
The problem is that even films like ‘Parzania’ deflect from the issue by emphasising an incident/person. Did you think ‘Black Friday’ was subtle? It was extremely devious. (http://farzana-versey.blogspot.com/2007/02/how-realistic-is-black-friday.html)
Gujarati theatre is populist in the extreme, for the most part. We are taking about a culture that is economically driven – whether it is the state, the nature of the medium, the people involved. Most Gujarati plays cater to a fairly insulated middle class and the social messages have to do with the problems of everyday living and relationships.
Marathi theatre has always displayed a greater social consciousness, even more than Hindi and English, the last again getting bogged down by the confusion of using western inspiration to adapt. ‘Final Solutions’ was an indigenous voice.
P.S.: What do you have against Boston ‘Marathi Mandals’? Why not New Jersey? However, I think Tendulkar’s query was simplistic, though not invalid. Here we are talking about parochialism within and I realise that one should not even be calling them immigrants in the general sense.
- - -
RBaruah:
Hi and good to see you back!
The news is that SP has spared Jaya Bachchan. Question is: will she stay on? It would mean keeping all options open till the right time. Oh, sure, they do get their timings right. Amar Singh has been thrown out what Jaya Prada and you should have sen how she kept harping about how she was with him and will stay with him.
I think there will be a two-pronged attack – one at the BJP HQ, the other at the Congress HQ, and then there will be some bargaining, and perhaps even a fallout of convenience. (Brothers separated but still with great regard for each other!) Poor Mulayam got Kalyan Singh and may now have to get the whole BJP! Mayawati should take time out form statues to watch the fun :)
Farzana,
ReplyDeleteYou said :
"The latter two films on the Bombay riots do not constitute popular culture, and Ratnam’s movie had its share of stereotypes. One reason that there is silence on Gujarat (what about ‘Firaaq’?) is that there is an established system and leader; the same was not true of Mumbai because it became a national movement.
The problem is that even films like ‘Parzania’ deflect from the issue by emphasising an incident/person. Did you think ‘Black Friday’ was subtle? It was extremely devious. (http://farzana-versey.blogspot.com/2007/02/how-realistic-is-black-friday.html)".
A couple of points here....
We are talking about the reflections in popular culture. Rhetoric is a different matter, though (a point on that is made somewhere down the line). I find myself agreeing with you regarding "Hum Beherampada mein rehte...." not really being a part of "popular culture". However, am not so sure about "Salim Langde Pe mat ro" as in my own experience the film has been fairly well known.
On the "Black Friday" - the part that shows the situation during riots - especially state apathy and terribly hopeless situation for the muslims came out rather well. Yes, the film did have its share of stereotypes - but that was not the point of the post.
Speaking of stereotypes, my take is we see a fallback on stereotypes as incidents like Mumbai Riots handled in popular culture are narrated from a detached "liberal Hindu" perspective. Narratives with a Muslim perspective ("Hum Beherampada...." probably falls in that category) may see less of such stereotypes and may even highlight the state's failures rather accurately.
About Gujarat, I disagree with your assessment. For one, Gujarat situation had been systematically orchestrated by the state over the years (remember Christians being at the recieving end before Muslims ?), so this was kinda "frog in the boiling water" situation. Secondly, and this is a major difference, unlike in Gujarat the commercial establishments suffered a big "collateral damage".
Finally , about the social consciousness of marathi theatre... Well, fine, agreed. Feels great to be a Marathi. But then , think again, in the context of Mumbai and Gujarat incidents the same theatrewallahs failed to register as much of a protest.
Cheers,
Mahesh.
P.S.: On a lighter Note, about Boston Marathi Mandals. The thing is - my college day girlfriend eloped with a close friend of mine and both have settled in Boston since then. The ire was directed towards the "bewafaa couple". Never mind, it's a loser thing - you may not understand it. :-)
Hi Mahesh:
ReplyDeleteTumi raat paayli kartos kai?! Will reply later...with dreams of a visa for the kumbh mela or the Vatican :)
Shubh raatri/suprabhat...
PS: Also fighting work demons...
Mahesh:
ReplyDeleteEven ‘Salim Langde…’, though well-known, did not use the language of popular cinema, and whatever be our beef with it, there is a limited reach of offbeat films. We are not talking rhetoric here.
Let us disagree on ‘Black Friday’; those moments were only to buffer the other points I made in that piece.
Speaking of stereotypes, my take is we see a fallback on stereotypes as incidents like Mumbai Riots handled in popular culture are narrated from a detached "liberal Hindu" perspective. Narratives with a Muslim perspective ("Hum Beherampada...." probably falls in that category) may see less of such stereotypes and may even highlight the state's failures rather accurately.
Are these aspects “detached”, “liberal Hindu”, “Muslim perspective” also not stereotypes? I would like a situation when we can say that some film or any creative effort succeeded or failed in making a point because the person doing so understood it or did not. Unless it is a personal narrative, where an ‘identity’ question is germane, I don’t see these as necessary even as mofussil parameters.
About Gujarat, I disagree with your assessment. For one, Gujarat situation had been systematically orchestrated by the state over the years (remember Christians being at the recieving end before Muslims ?), so this was kinda "frog in the boiling water" situation. Secondly, and this is a major difference, unlike in Gujarat the commercial establishments suffered a big "collateral damage".
Now, there are parallels. What about the persecution in Mumbai of the Christians, Gujaratis, S. Indians by the Shiv Sena, which has been a dominant force for several years? Are you referring to collateral damage in Mumbai? Yes, it did happen, but what about the commercial damage in Gujarat – malls, shops, homes destroyed?
I admit I have not watched much Marathi, or any theatre, for a while as regularly as I used to. Do you think it is deliberate? Have they always commented on every social issue? I think if theatre follows a broad consciousness about non-stereotypes, it is making a point. (Now, am I trying to keep the SS or MNS guys happy?)
PS: Thanks for sharing your Boston story…
Why do you think I would not understand a “loser thing”? Hah, I did not even have a boyfriend in college…
PPS: I am reposting this because I mistook 'Marathi mandal' for 'Mahila Mandal' and asked a rather inconvenient question:)
Farzana,
ReplyDeleteResponding to your point :
"Are these aspects “detached”, “liberal Hindu”, “Muslim perspective” also not stereotypes? I would like a situation when we can say that some film or any creative effort succeeded or failed in making a point because the person doing so understood it or did not. Unless it is a personal narrative, where an ‘identity’ question is germane, I don’t see these as necessary even as mofussil parameters."
To an extent I find myself agreeing with you on the terms "detached", "liberal Hindu", "Muslim Perspective" being stereotypes. The part that conflicts against this argument is something to do with my own personal experiences during the Mumbai Carnage of 92-93. The political arguments in public discourse during the period wildly oscillated between liberal helplessness and hardliner aggresiveness. My metaphors stemmed from this experience (in fact, some experiences have been much more ghastly - but never mind...).Stereotypes were definitely not intended here. If it came out that way - my apologies without being apologetic
about it. :-)
Considering what happened in Mumbai then - "I would like a situation when we can say that some film or any creative effort succeeded or failed in making a point because the person doing so understood it or did not. " sounds far more clinical. But again - these are different perspectives, which both of us are entitled to - and neither me nor you need to be apologetic about it as long as the discussion is civil enough.
Cheers,
Mahesh.
P.S: Have a nice weekstart.
Mahesh:
ReplyDeleteThe last thing I'd see as a good a parameter for this discussion or most would be apologia - as apology or being apologetic. I thought you;d understand, given our previous interactions.
I was taking the discussion forward by pointing out 'counter stereotypes'...one cannot be devoid of any since we are labelled for various reasons, and not all uncomfortable ones.
Re. being clinical, I can hardly be accused of it or promoting it. My complete statements used the word 'understanding', and to understand something one needs to delve deeply, not necessarily clinically. And I did emphasise that it might be different for personal narratives; it was also in response to your comment about films being made by Muslims not creating such stereotypes.
Yes, we have had "civil" dialogues and may have different perspectives. But I see nothing wrong if there is an attempt to fuse two ways of seeing if it reaches greater 'understanding'.
Maybe it is the 'clinician' in me. Yes, I am pissed off...in a civil sort of way.
PS: Thanks for the wishes for a nice weekstart. You too...