Belabouring Over Child Labour
By Farzana Versey
Countercurrents.org
October 13, 2006
The Indian government's recent announcement banning the employment of children as domestic servants and workers in roadside eateries, restaurants, teashops starts with a problem. The age limit is below 14 years. And its figures are 80 per cent off the mark – the verdict talks about 20 million children whereas the number is close to a 100 million.
Child labour is an inevitability. It sounds awfully romantic to shed tears over this fact, but then we forget that if they were not rolling beedis or knotting carpets or serving food, they would be out in the streets robbing, soliciting or even begging. The last ought to be taken into special account because there is a large mafia that maims children for them to qualify as prized beggars.
Often children work on their own in these unorganised sectors before they 'graduate' to working for employers. This is where a defined exploitation comes in.
Gerard Oonk, spokesperson of the international campaign 'Stop Child Labour – School is the best place to work', that India is affiliated to, has commented on the recent ban: "This is a very important step in the fight against child labour. Hopefully the Indian government will combine it with sound rehabilitation programmes, as many children are traumatized, and with programmes to get them into regular schools, either directly or through special bridge programmes."
This is naïve and hands over responsibility to an establishment that in the past took action only because the United States refused to buy our carpets. A follow-up action is a utopian dream. In our armchair cogitations, we completely forget the person at the centre of this: the child.
I have met a number of children working in private establishments in the tanneries at Dharavi, in shops, doing arduous work, and they all felt work was the only way out. Mubarak who left a job washing dishes at a small restaurant now works in a factory making flash doors and at the very suggestion of banning child labour he had smirked, "What's wrong with working anyway? It is better than being in the streets. If you ask me I am willing to work anywhere, do anything as long as I make money. I have to survive in this city."
Together with child labour are connected the issues of other remedial actions, for many of them are immigrants. The pavement becomes the child's home. In Brazil they used to kill street children; in India it is a case of slow poisoning – hafta, drug peddling, pimping, prostitution and the inhumanity which robs them of innocence.
The present ban that has been imposed under the Child labour (Prohibition and Regulation) Act 1986 mentions frequent physical violence, psychological traumas and "at some times" sexual abuse. Long working hours are mentioned, too.
Who is going to ensure that there will not be night shift, that there will be a one-hour rest period in the stipulated six-hour day, and that the employer would maintain a muster roll? Isn't the employer the exploiter? Aren't the parents conniving due to financial compulsions?
Children themselves are powerless. Sanctifying child labour with all the provisions will not take away the bondage factor, just as abolishing it on paper is not going to end its practice. Several years ago a Bill was tabled in the Upper House making provisions for minimum legal protection: "Any person can file a complaint before the courts," it said in all earnestness.
Who would go around scouting in factories, make-shift hovels and homes to find beleaguered children who would bare their souls? Moreover, who would take the case to court? Would the parents, themselves ignorant, helpless and a party to the deal, fight against an employer who is their mai-baap? Or does the law think that work experience has made the child so mature that s/he could hire a lawyer and make the employer a respondent?
Let us extend the parameters a bit. Remember all those children immortalised in Mira Nair's film 'Salaam Bombay'? They were back to where they belonged, where they were meant to belong. In the gush of authenticity it was forgotten that the raw emotions they exposed for the camera would stay with them. They too were exploited.
Or take the reality shows on television, be it a fun programme or a serious music contest. Children look and perform like adults and are made to wear outlandish and vulgar clothes. It isn't their education that counts, but how well they can manipulate the audience to send SMS votes that seems to matter.
Parents themselves exploit these kids by pushing them in directions they had wanted to go but couldn't. Under the garb of promoting their untapped talent, they display them as their property, emotionally blackmailing them all the time.
Employers are only one of the categories of exploiters.
12.10.06
Another Kiran -- this time Fortune's
Three Indian women have made it to Fortune’s 50 most powerful businesswomen in the world list.
While Chanda Kochchar and Naina Lal Kidwai are bankers, Kiran Mazumdar Shaw is an entrepreneur. As head of Biocon, she has revolutionised the biopharmaceutical industry.
Of course, I do not understand a thing about the subject. I had met her years ago at the airport departure lounge in Mumbai. I was a bit fidgety as I had an important assignment that same evening. A slightly plump woman came and sat next to me. We exchanged smiles.
She guessed I was on work; I was doing everything possible to convey I meant business to hide the fact that I thoroughly enjoyed what I was doing. I have noticed that if you appear laidback and chilled out, nobody takes you seriously. At that stage, I wanted to convey I was serious.
“Yes,” I replied. She was a curious person and wanted to know more. I told her and suddenly I was like my old stupid self, sounding excited. I did not ask her much, but she told me to get in touch with her if I needed anything. She handed me a card. It said ‘Biocon’. It sounded like medicine, so I dumped it in my bag.
Two days into my ‘work’ and I had an evening free. I dialled Kiran’s number and she immediately invited me over. She wanted to know how I’d get there. “Oh, I’ll manage,” I said like always do.
I looked at the address on the visiting card and called up the photographer to ask him how far it was. He said, “Kiran Mazumdar? Great.”
Why was it great? He explained to me that she was quite a biggie. I did not want him around. So I hired a taxi that drove me to god-knows-where. She was a warm person; her living room seemed to be a bit dark for tea-time, though. We indulged in what seemed like girlie talk for quite a while and then I realised that she was a biggie. This meant I could interview her.
“You know I can interview you,” I said.
To her credit, she remained unfazed. I rattled off general, non-Biocon type questions and she answered. I cannot recall much, which is surprising, but it wasn’t a dazzling performance. Later, I wrote it out, adding a lot of background details, and gave it to the editor. “Who is she?” I was asked.
“She heads Biocon,” I said authoritatively.
“Uhh…we’ll see.”
The interview was never used. I did not even bother to remind the editor. And today I do not kick myself for not preserving a copy.
What struck me about the woman then was her humaneness, and that is what I will remember. Her being on Fortune’s list is less important to me than her being the child of fortune and hard work.
While Chanda Kochchar and Naina Lal Kidwai are bankers, Kiran Mazumdar Shaw is an entrepreneur. As head of Biocon, she has revolutionised the biopharmaceutical industry.
Of course, I do not understand a thing about the subject. I had met her years ago at the airport departure lounge in Mumbai. I was a bit fidgety as I had an important assignment that same evening. A slightly plump woman came and sat next to me. We exchanged smiles.
She guessed I was on work; I was doing everything possible to convey I meant business to hide the fact that I thoroughly enjoyed what I was doing. I have noticed that if you appear laidback and chilled out, nobody takes you seriously. At that stage, I wanted to convey I was serious.
“Yes,” I replied. She was a curious person and wanted to know more. I told her and suddenly I was like my old stupid self, sounding excited. I did not ask her much, but she told me to get in touch with her if I needed anything. She handed me a card. It said ‘Biocon’. It sounded like medicine, so I dumped it in my bag.
Two days into my ‘work’ and I had an evening free. I dialled Kiran’s number and she immediately invited me over. She wanted to know how I’d get there. “Oh, I’ll manage,” I said like always do.
I looked at the address on the visiting card and called up the photographer to ask him how far it was. He said, “Kiran Mazumdar? Great.”
Why was it great? He explained to me that she was quite a biggie. I did not want him around. So I hired a taxi that drove me to god-knows-where. She was a warm person; her living room seemed to be a bit dark for tea-time, though. We indulged in what seemed like girlie talk for quite a while and then I realised that she was a biggie. This meant I could interview her.
“You know I can interview you,” I said.
To her credit, she remained unfazed. I rattled off general, non-Biocon type questions and she answered. I cannot recall much, which is surprising, but it wasn’t a dazzling performance. Later, I wrote it out, adding a lot of background details, and gave it to the editor. “Who is she?” I was asked.
“She heads Biocon,” I said authoritatively.
“Uhh…we’ll see.”
The interview was never used. I did not even bother to remind the editor. And today I do not kick myself for not preserving a copy.
What struck me about the woman then was her humaneness, and that is what I will remember. Her being on Fortune’s list is less important to me than her being the child of fortune and hard work.
10.10.06
The Kanshi Ram that Mayawati kept alive
That the funeral rites of Kanshi Ram should get embroiled in controversy is no surprise. I’d say he has been among the most under-rated leaders in India. In a society where caste matters, his Bahujan Samaj Party was meant for those who to this day have to go through the ignominy of being called ‘lower caste’ and ‘untouchable’ in some parts of rural India.
He became a Dalit, like many such ‘backward class’ people do. To stick one’s neck out in a place where politics is gossip, appetizer and a dose of nashaa, was indeed a bold move. Uttar Pradesh has always been a thakur/dacoit/local mafia domain.
Kanshi Ram changed all that. There were taller leaders than him, but they went the route of national politics. He stayed put in the vast expanse of UP. And then he introduced Mayawati. There is no doubt that he groomed her and pushed her in the forefront, and in an atmosphere where hypocrisy prevails, these two broke all those barriers to openly live together without engaging in any discussions on the subject.
Mayawati has had to bear a lot of flak, some of it well-deserved. She is a shrill woman, power-hungry, making use of her position to start completely faulty projects. On one of my visits to Lucknow when she was the chief minister, there was this horrendous Ambedkar park project with the leader’s statue on a granite platform.
She is wrong on many counts. But how worse is she than other leaders? Mulayam is a shrewd little man. While Mayawati can rightly be blamed for initiating the Taj corridor project, he has been giving away precious farmer’s land to Reliance for a pittance. He went about preening as ‘Maulana Mulayam’ but he will ditch any cause to become ’Mahant Mulayam’. He has his hangers-on, notably Amar Singh, who is a useless, media crazy man. He spends time doling out Rajya Sabha tickets and other sops to celebrities. Mulayam Singh is today Amitabh Bachchan’s devta. Why? Mr. Bachchan lives in Mumbai, has loads of money and fame. Why does a politician in another state become his god? One is aware that god is omnipotent etc, but faith has got to have some basis.
Mayawati has to work with these people around. They say she kept Kanshi Ram in captivity. Even if she did, he was terribly ill when we saw him on a TV programme. I think she kept the myth alive. But being a single woman in a place where you find shops selling arms openly in the bazaars she had to be attributed with dire motives. No politician works without motives, but the gender factor did come in here.
To make matters a bit more difficult, unlike Jayalalitha she does not have a convent accent and her guru was not a dead film star. She lacks glamour and speaks for those who are voiceless. Kanshi Ram saw the spark in her and she retained it and the memory of the man.
She is certainly not the best thing around, but to keep the wolves at bay we cannot have little Red Riding Hoods lost in the woods.
She will now be faced with Kanshi Ram’s ghost by those who didn’t give a damn about him. It is time we accepted that a person – and a woman too – has an individual style of functioning. Her tribute to her mentor will be to shut the mouths of the naysayers and truly work for those who have no say and have no right of way…
He became a Dalit, like many such ‘backward class’ people do. To stick one’s neck out in a place where politics is gossip, appetizer and a dose of nashaa, was indeed a bold move. Uttar Pradesh has always been a thakur/dacoit/local mafia domain.
Kanshi Ram changed all that. There were taller leaders than him, but they went the route of national politics. He stayed put in the vast expanse of UP. And then he introduced Mayawati. There is no doubt that he groomed her and pushed her in the forefront, and in an atmosphere where hypocrisy prevails, these two broke all those barriers to openly live together without engaging in any discussions on the subject.
Mayawati has had to bear a lot of flak, some of it well-deserved. She is a shrill woman, power-hungry, making use of her position to start completely faulty projects. On one of my visits to Lucknow when she was the chief minister, there was this horrendous Ambedkar park project with the leader’s statue on a granite platform.
She is wrong on many counts. But how worse is she than other leaders? Mulayam is a shrewd little man. While Mayawati can rightly be blamed for initiating the Taj corridor project, he has been giving away precious farmer’s land to Reliance for a pittance. He went about preening as ‘Maulana Mulayam’ but he will ditch any cause to become ’Mahant Mulayam’. He has his hangers-on, notably Amar Singh, who is a useless, media crazy man. He spends time doling out Rajya Sabha tickets and other sops to celebrities. Mulayam Singh is today Amitabh Bachchan’s devta. Why? Mr. Bachchan lives in Mumbai, has loads of money and fame. Why does a politician in another state become his god? One is aware that god is omnipotent etc, but faith has got to have some basis.
Mayawati has to work with these people around. They say she kept Kanshi Ram in captivity. Even if she did, he was terribly ill when we saw him on a TV programme. I think she kept the myth alive. But being a single woman in a place where you find shops selling arms openly in the bazaars she had to be attributed with dire motives. No politician works without motives, but the gender factor did come in here.
To make matters a bit more difficult, unlike Jayalalitha she does not have a convent accent and her guru was not a dead film star. She lacks glamour and speaks for those who are voiceless. Kanshi Ram saw the spark in her and she retained it and the memory of the man.
She is certainly not the best thing around, but to keep the wolves at bay we cannot have little Red Riding Hoods lost in the woods.
She will now be faced with Kanshi Ram’s ghost by those who didn’t give a damn about him. It is time we accepted that a person – and a woman too – has an individual style of functioning. Her tribute to her mentor will be to shut the mouths of the naysayers and truly work for those who have no say and have no right of way…
6.10.06
Get real about Mohammad Afzal
India would not have got Independence had hanging served as a deterrent to terrorist activity. Our freedom fighters like Bhagat Singh, Chandrasekhar Azad, Rajguru -- all dubbed terrorists by the British who ran this country -- were responsible for the killing of innocents as part of their strategy; their target was never innocents.
Therefore, please let us not make the Mohammad Afzal very real dilemma into a frikkin soap opera. I have given my point of view in the blog of 29.9.06, but these ‘human’ stories should be left out for the moment. Afzal’s son, apparently, tried to tie a rope round his neck…his mother said something about him trying to feel the pain of his father. Sorry, the kid is seven and I am aware that children exposed to such extreme trauma do grow up fast, but this is no time or occasion for pop psychology.
We do have the other side where the widow of a CRPF jawaan, killed in the Parliament attack, who was posthumously awarded the Ashoka Chakra has threatened to return the medal if Afzal is not given the death sentence. No time for blackmail too.
Time to stick to the bare essentials.
1. The Congress (that has suddenly got chicken) now says they are against clemency; the BJP has always said so; the Shiv Sena…who the heck cares for it…Wait a minute. Political parties cannot decide on this issue. It is solely Presidential discretion.
2. Afzal is an Indian. It is clear we believe Indians are not capable of heinous acts on their own. As his lawyer Nandita Haksar pointed out, despite the apex court having acquitted Afzal of charges of belonging to any terrorist organisation, he is still referred to as a JeM (Jaish-e-Mohammed) operative.
3. Why the hell has the Hurriyat Conference’s Mirwaiz Umar Farooq taken up the issue of Afzal death sentence with the Bush administration in New York and sought their intervention towards seeking clemency for him? Does he not understand that the US is one of the biggest ‘civilised’ terror factories? Can we not handle the issue ourselves? This will send out the wrong signal to the Indian government.
4. A group of concerned citizens had written to the prime minister in December 2004. They had put forth a few pertinent points:
-The prosecution produced 80 witnesses. None of them even mentioned that the four persons accused of conspiring to attack the Parliament have any link to any illegal or banned organisation. All of them were acquitted of charges of belonging to a terrorist organisation.
-If Afzal was a surrendered militant how would the Pak-based JeM use him?
-His confessions were made under conditions of torture and the police made him implicate himself before the media.
-One of the other accused, Prof. S.A.R. Geelani, was framed on the basis of forged documents and fabricated evidence. After his acquittal, he has been speaking out and giving details about the conditions under which prisoners in the high risk cells are kept. The National Human Rights Commission instead of investigating the allegations closed the case filed by Mr Geelani on the ground that the jail authorities have denied the charges.
What do you expect jail authorities to do?
No one expects an emotional response. These are practical issues that need to be addressed. And for those who have accused me of bringing in other cases, like the Bombay riots, the authorities are doing it all the time. Giving examples of what happens in Pakistan. Get real. Pakistan is a different country now.
I am interested in India. Aren’t you?
Therefore, please let us not make the Mohammad Afzal very real dilemma into a frikkin soap opera. I have given my point of view in the blog of 29.9.06, but these ‘human’ stories should be left out for the moment. Afzal’s son, apparently, tried to tie a rope round his neck…his mother said something about him trying to feel the pain of his father. Sorry, the kid is seven and I am aware that children exposed to such extreme trauma do grow up fast, but this is no time or occasion for pop psychology.
We do have the other side where the widow of a CRPF jawaan, killed in the Parliament attack, who was posthumously awarded the Ashoka Chakra has threatened to return the medal if Afzal is not given the death sentence. No time for blackmail too.
Time to stick to the bare essentials.
1. The Congress (that has suddenly got chicken) now says they are against clemency; the BJP has always said so; the Shiv Sena…who the heck cares for it…Wait a minute. Political parties cannot decide on this issue. It is solely Presidential discretion.
2. Afzal is an Indian. It is clear we believe Indians are not capable of heinous acts on their own. As his lawyer Nandita Haksar pointed out, despite the apex court having acquitted Afzal of charges of belonging to any terrorist organisation, he is still referred to as a JeM (Jaish-e-Mohammed) operative.
3. Why the hell has the Hurriyat Conference’s Mirwaiz Umar Farooq taken up the issue of Afzal death sentence with the Bush administration in New York and sought their intervention towards seeking clemency for him? Does he not understand that the US is one of the biggest ‘civilised’ terror factories? Can we not handle the issue ourselves? This will send out the wrong signal to the Indian government.
4. A group of concerned citizens had written to the prime minister in December 2004. They had put forth a few pertinent points:
-The prosecution produced 80 witnesses. None of them even mentioned that the four persons accused of conspiring to attack the Parliament have any link to any illegal or banned organisation. All of them were acquitted of charges of belonging to a terrorist organisation.
-If Afzal was a surrendered militant how would the Pak-based JeM use him?
-His confessions were made under conditions of torture and the police made him implicate himself before the media.
-One of the other accused, Prof. S.A.R. Geelani, was framed on the basis of forged documents and fabricated evidence. After his acquittal, he has been speaking out and giving details about the conditions under which prisoners in the high risk cells are kept. The National Human Rights Commission instead of investigating the allegations closed the case filed by Mr Geelani on the ground that the jail authorities have denied the charges.
What do you expect jail authorities to do?
No one expects an emotional response. These are practical issues that need to be addressed. And for those who have accused me of bringing in other cases, like the Bombay riots, the authorities are doing it all the time. Giving examples of what happens in Pakistan. Get real. Pakistan is a different country now.
I am interested in India. Aren’t you?
Brangelina tracked by cops!
Take a good look at this car. Someone put life and limb at risk to shoot this picture. Isn’t that why it is on the front page of the largest-circulated daily in India? The press kept a vigil for the past few days, but the van sneaked away.A report stated, “As there was no intimation to the city police about the arrival of the star couple, and their further movements, the police has now decided to track them on their own. ‘Teams have been formed to check all their movements and provide security to them,’ a senior police official said, adding that it was aimed at mob control, besides ensuring their security during their stay in the city.”
This is not a tip-off about a terrorist attack. This is two of Hollywood’s film stars, Angelina Jolie and Brad Pitt, who are here not on government invitation or for some social cause but to shoot for a film.
They were “received at the airport” by the chief of security. Does anyone do that for our stars when they visit any country in the West?
For the past few days the media is feeding us information about where they may or may not stay, who will be with them, what they may or may not do…
This is paparazzi stuff and fine as gossip goes. But why is the police acting like hangers-on? “Check all their movements”…phew…if only our security were not so lax where it mattered even more.
4.10.06
Katrina's legs in Ajmer
Actress Katrina Kaif’s legs making headlines. She prayed at the Khwaja Moinuddin Chisti dargah in Ajmer wearing a skirt. I wonder how this has become news. Who leaked it out? Is it because this was part of the shooting of a film?Sarwar Chisti, spokesperson of the Anjuman, which is the elected body of representatives of Khadims said, “Nobody objected to this but the media took up the issue and created the controversy.’’
A report in the TOI further states, “Chisti said many celebrities come to the Dargah and it was not the Khadims’ job to look down at their legs and see what they were wearing.”
This sort of composure is admirable. There are two ways of looking at the issue.
1. I have visited several places of worship for whatever reason and I think it is important to be dressed appropriately. Mainly because in most religions you have to be seated on the floor and baring legs makes it difficult. This is not a gender issue. You do not see men wearing shorts, unless they are really desperate desis trying to appear hip. Besides, I just do not see the logic of covering your head if you do not cover your legs.
2. Why are the devotees looking at these stars instead of doing their job as believers? And if god has created the human being and her/his anatomy, then as long as there is no vulgar display it should not be seen as offensive. I find it more disgusting to watch women in hijaab (I am talking about the cursory head scarves) in some ‘progressive’ Muslim countries wearing tight-fitting shirts and skirts/slacks. Even in Pakistan, they may cover their heads, but see how the kameezes are cut at the sides – they rise almost up to the hip. Not only does it look undignified, it is also an assault on aesthetics as you can see the line of the salwaar where the ‘band’ stops and the pleats begin.
I find that these religious standard forms of clothing are becoming more and more victims of fashion, which defeats the purpose. If the reason is modesty, then how does it work? What is the point of hiding your hair and wearing electric blue eye-shadow and glitter on your cheeks?
Regarding the Ajmer episode, many temples in fact have a mandatory dress code. Some of them even have counters where you can borrow a saree or long cloth to wrap around you, even if you are not baring your legs.
I do not protest to this because it is the custom and if I have problems I should just stay away. Honestly, one should have better places where one can bare one’s legs.
2.10.06
Gandhi ne tau apun ko maamu banaaya...
I think the Gandhian philosophy has a lot going for it, except for the fact that it is associated with the Mahatma!
Here was a real canny salesman. Is it any wonder that we now have a film that is marketing his ideas? I am upto my gills with this Gandhigiri that the film Lage Raho Munnabhai has been promoting.
I watched the movie, but I won’t ever buy the T-shirt. As time-pass it worked well, but will someone please stop this nonsense about the non-preachy message it conveys and how it has reinvented Gandhi? If anything, it is preachy as hell. Just when I wanted to let out a laugh, I would have to adjust my face into a beatific smile because Bapu was hovering somewhere behind our hero. Damn.
The reinvention is more simplistic than Aesop’s Fables…it is like after every episode we are told, “And the moral of the story is…” I felt I was in school.
To be honest, it is the character of Circuit who is the most Gandhian, a philosophy the Mahatma preached but hardly practised himself. Circuit remains the backroom guy, the kingmaker, so to speak, he is grounded, he has almost no desires for himself, he does not expect forgiveness, and he is ostensibly celibate…he does not watch the chicks or flirt with them…
As for those lessons that are learned and problems solved they are plain silly. A girl wants to know what she should look for if she has to marry a certain boy . Ah, says Gandhiji, check out how he treats those lower than him in status. She does; she hears him calling out to the waiter with a “Shoo…shoo” and walks out. Hey, if she was this unsure why did she go to that coffee shop at all? Sure, it is not good manners to call out to anyone in this fashion, but as though our loving Gandhiji did not get work done by his minions…who massaged his feet, who gave him support while walking?
Then there is the guy who loses all of his father’s money. He is told to confess. He does so. Big deal. It is obvious he is a nice guy and wants to end his life like all nice guys should. After the piece of advice what does he end up doing? Driving a taxi and escorting runaway brides and talking to radio shows.
Gandhiji conveys to the runaway bride that she should forget about superstitions, if the man loves her he will marry her. Aha, this was the man who was superstitious in the extreme and showed scant respect for his own wife’s consent before taking important marital decisions….
As for those silent protest scenes outside the builder’s house, I’d love to see how anyone would allow it. Yeh hai Mumbai meri jaan…
And the guy who spits near his neighbour’s house is shamed after he realises the neighbour is washing up after him. Long years ago people had already found a way out of this thoo-thoo dilemma. Just place a picture of a deity or some godlike motif and the spitting stops. In India we are like that only…The Bapu spent most of his time lying down, except for those Dandi and other marches. Here he gets everyone to work.
Well, hum honge ‘kaam’yaab, as we say…so happy birthday, Gandhiji. This is a good year for you. You produced a blockbuster and once again proved what a great PR guy you are. Maan gaye, Ustad.
Here was a real canny salesman. Is it any wonder that we now have a film that is marketing his ideas? I am upto my gills with this Gandhigiri that the film Lage Raho Munnabhai has been promoting.
I watched the movie, but I won’t ever buy the T-shirt. As time-pass it worked well, but will someone please stop this nonsense about the non-preachy message it conveys and how it has reinvented Gandhi? If anything, it is preachy as hell. Just when I wanted to let out a laugh, I would have to adjust my face into a beatific smile because Bapu was hovering somewhere behind our hero. Damn.
The reinvention is more simplistic than Aesop’s Fables…it is like after every episode we are told, “And the moral of the story is…” I felt I was in school.
To be honest, it is the character of Circuit who is the most Gandhian, a philosophy the Mahatma preached but hardly practised himself. Circuit remains the backroom guy, the kingmaker, so to speak, he is grounded, he has almost no desires for himself, he does not expect forgiveness, and he is ostensibly celibate…he does not watch the chicks or flirt with them…
As for those lessons that are learned and problems solved they are plain silly. A girl wants to know what she should look for if she has to marry a certain boy . Ah, says Gandhiji, check out how he treats those lower than him in status. She does; she hears him calling out to the waiter with a “Shoo…shoo” and walks out. Hey, if she was this unsure why did she go to that coffee shop at all? Sure, it is not good manners to call out to anyone in this fashion, but as though our loving Gandhiji did not get work done by his minions…who massaged his feet, who gave him support while walking?
Then there is the guy who loses all of his father’s money. He is told to confess. He does so. Big deal. It is obvious he is a nice guy and wants to end his life like all nice guys should. After the piece of advice what does he end up doing? Driving a taxi and escorting runaway brides and talking to radio shows.
Gandhiji conveys to the runaway bride that she should forget about superstitions, if the man loves her he will marry her. Aha, this was the man who was superstitious in the extreme and showed scant respect for his own wife’s consent before taking important marital decisions….
As for those silent protest scenes outside the builder’s house, I’d love to see how anyone would allow it. Yeh hai Mumbai meri jaan…
And the guy who spits near his neighbour’s house is shamed after he realises the neighbour is washing up after him. Long years ago people had already found a way out of this thoo-thoo dilemma. Just place a picture of a deity or some godlike motif and the spitting stops. In India we are like that only…The Bapu spent most of his time lying down, except for those Dandi and other marches. Here he gets everyone to work.
Well, hum honge ‘kaam’yaab, as we say…so happy birthday, Gandhiji. This is a good year for you. You produced a blockbuster and once again proved what a great PR guy you are. Maan gaye, Ustad.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)