“The unlawful use of violence and intimidation, especially against civilians, in the pursuit of political aims.” I’m not sure how many of you will be able to think of the word that is defined as the above line by the Oxford Dictionary. Yes, the word is ‘terrorism’.
The movie “Mulk” (2018) has raised such basic questions about our perception of terrorism that finding answers to these questions seems like a necessity today. Some of the smallest or shortest scenes which were closest to my heart and make the movie a must watch for everyone:
1) Mohammed Ali, a civilian and prestigious advocate who is lively social being, living harmoniously in his home town.
2) His family has accepted his inter-religion marriage; in fact the ‘bahu‘ became the daughter of the family!
3) Aarthi’s disagreement on deciding a religion for the ‘yet to be born’ child.
4) Aarthi’s family, supposedly a broad minded one, succumb to prejudice and fear and ask her to come back. But her decisions make us believe that she is truly the daughter of the family.
5) Choti Tabassum , mother of Shahid, denying her son’s dead body after she learns about his deeds.
6) Basically, it is all between US AND THEM
7) Chaube’s suggestion to his son asking him to leave unnecessary communal activities. But later, the father himself changes with time, thereby revealing his prejudiced mindset: “Hum logon ne kya kya nahi diya , phir bhi tum log hamare logon ko marte ho!!”
8) Mohammed Ali questions police officer when his house is attacked by goons and the officer denies filing an FIR. “Hum kare tho terrorism aur wo kare tho bas gundagiri!!??”
9) Lawyers calling terrorism as “inke family business“, and all the comments on marriage, children, education of ‘unke samaj‘. The laughter that follows when the characters don’t realise that “hamare samaj” is still the same as “unke sama”, so it has always been hum aur wo!!
10) The respect and responsibilities Mohamed Ali has for his younger brother despite their disagreements in life.
11) Bilal’s character that is etched with so many flaws in a single person but still proves to be “jo bhi hai, phir bhi dil ke achche hai”. How innocent was his ignorance toward many facts about his own son or asking for money from his relatives in Pakistan!
12) Bismil’s death scene is the most painful one, where no one turns up at his funeral.
13) Prejudiced officer belonging to same religion as of accused and chooses to defame the whole family to reclaim religious credibility. This character has also highlighted flaws in the judiciary – a terrorist once arrested needs high level security and all the further proceedings are delayed which makes police protect criminals in the form of VIPs. “Doosra kasab ban jaayega.”
14) Different aspects of the very same word – terrorism – beautifully questioned: “Kya untouchability terrorism nahi hai kya? Paise walon se gareebon ka exploitation terrorism nahi hai? Kya aadivasiyon ka exploitation terrorism nahi hi ?”
15) Also, the film successfully addresses unemployment. Through Shahid’s friend Rashad, it clears the fact that unemployment in our country isn’t limited to a single religion.
16) Finally, it shows how there is no law to punish the ignorance of not looking after your kids.
“Look after the youngsters in family; what they do, what they talk about, what they watch, etc.”
17) Mohammed Ali’s question about how to show ‘love for the country’ really makes one to question the essence of patriotism.
18) Mohammed Ali’s Hindu friend being with him through all his hard times and at the same time Bilal’s Muslim friend denying to help him in the process of protecting his son (Rashad) shows how secular a human bond is.
19) The movie also portrays the insecurity felt by minorities or the people from “targeted religion” who stand in position of suspects by default. Ironically, prejudice and generalisation has become so deep rooted that a terrorist act with ulterior motives, which was supposed to create fear in masses, creates more fear and commotion in people of that targeted religion. They tend to feel like outsiders in their own land, admist their own people.
20) Mohammed Ali’s confidence over his country and system has been shown well; when he denies going to London with his son, corrects his wife’s lost hopes on people and stops his community people from making it a communal issue !
21) About “go to Pakistan”: this can be only said by those who don’t know about “community values”. The judge in film, although only partially, tries to make people understand that minorities make their own contribution to the country. Their significance is as important as that of others for a country like India to progress.
The is definitely very successful in raising questions surrounding many prejudices. Overall, it’s a must watch for everyone.
“नहीं इतना मज़ा नहीं आ रहा है, वो क्या है ना कि इनको लास्ट मोमेंट पर याद आया कि कंडोम तो है ही नहीं, जब तक लेकर आये तब तक…”
इस शुक्रवार 10 अगस्त को निर्माता आनंद एल रॉय तथा फैंटम फिल्म्स द्वारा निर्मित फिल्म का ट्रेलर लॉन्च हो गया है। इसके निर्माता हैं अनुराग कश्यप। इससे पहले अनुराग की सभी फिल्में हार्डकोर कल्ट रही है जैसे गैंग्स ऑफ वासेपुर, देव डी। उनपर एक विशेष प्रकार की फिल्मे ही बनाने का तमगा लगा हुआ है। शायद अपनी इस फिल्म से अनुराग उन मुगालतों को तोड़ना चाहते हैं।
स्टार कास्ट
लेख के शुरुआत का संवाद ट्रेलर का अंतिम डायलॉग है, जिसमें रॉबी तथा रूमी हनीमून पर गए हुए हैं और उनकी चाची उनका अनुभव जानने के लिए उन्हें फोन करती हैं। संवाद से रूमी के बेबाक एवं तथाकथित बिगड़ी हुई लड़की होने का अंदाज़ा लगाया जा सकता है।
फिल्म में मुख्य भूमिका अभिषेक बच्चन, तापसी पन्नू तथा विक्की कौशल निभा रहे हैं। अभिषेक बच्चन के किरदार का नाम ‘रॉबी’ है, तापसी पन्नू के किरदार का ‘रूमी’ तथा विक्की कौशल के किरदार का ‘विक्की’।
फिल्म खास इसलिए भी लग रही है क्योंकि इस फिल्म में ना सिर्फ अनुराग कश्यप ने पहले से अलग काम किया है बल्कि अभिषेक बच्चन ने भी पहली बार पंजाबी किरदार निभाया है। विक्की कौशल भी पहली बार नए अंदाज में नज़र आने वाले हैं। वहीं तापसी फिल्म दर फिल्म अपना कद बढ़ा रही हैं।
प्लॉट
फिल्म मूलतः लव ट्रायंगल लग रही है, जिसमें तापसी पन्नू और विक्की कौशल एक दूसरे से प्यार करते हैं तथा शादी करना चाहते हैं, पर विक्की अभी तैयार नहीं है। तापसी उसपर दबाव बनाती हैं कि अगर उसने जल्द-से-जल्द शादी की बात नहीं की तो वो किसी से भी शादी कर लेगी।
अभिषेक और तापसी की शादी तय भी हो जाती है, पर प्यार तो प्यार है। अंदर तक घुस जाने के बाद आसानी से निकलता नहीं है। फिल्म की असल कहानी यही से शुरू होती है। फिल्म दिल्ली और पंजाब पर आधारित है।
म्यूज़िक
फिल्म का म्यूज़िक दिया है अमित त्रिवेदी ने। म्यूज़िक आपको ट्रेलर से कनेक्ट करता है। ‘फ्यार-व्यार’ और ‘दरया’ दो गानें फिलहाल ट्रेलर में सुनाई देते हैं जो दिल जीत लेते हैं। शीली ने फिल्म के गाने लिखे हैं। दरया गाने के लिरिक्स तो खूबसूरत हैं ही, इसे जिस तरह सूफी तरीके से फिल्माया गया है वह भी खास है।
विवाद
फिल्म में कई जगह अभिषेक बच्चन को पगड़ी पहने दिखाया गया है पर इसके बाद अचानक ही उनके बाल छोटे हो जाते हैं और पगड़ी गायब हो जाती है। यह सिख समुदाय के लिए आपत्तिजनक हो सकता है। अब आगे देखना है कि फिल्म की रिलीज़ में कोई समस्या आती है या यह आसानी से सिनेमाघरों में रिलीज़ हो जाती है। फिल्म 14 सितंबर को रिलीज़ हो रही है।
Sports bind India like nothing else can; and if the match that is being played is against your neighbouring country or England, the levels of patriotism are very high. Reema Kagti’s ‘Gold’ is a fictitious account that is inspired by some true events from India’s win in the 1948 Olympics as a newly independent nation.
Summary
First of all, we have Tapan Das (Akshay Kumar) as Team Manager of the Indian Hockey team, which is struggling to play together. The film starts with the 1936 Olympics in Berlin and we have Kunal Kapoor leading the team and winning the game against the Nazis. After 12 years of no major events, when an international hockey match is played, Tapan becomes irrelevant. In 1948, it is time for the London Olympics. Bengali speaking managers are at the center of the plot because they grab the opportunity and come to scout for talent for the national team.
Plot
When India is divided during Partition, things go for a toss toss, and the same happens to the hockey team also. The scenes related to this incident give us ample emotional moments in the film – the former Indian captain has to leave Pakistan to save his life, the Indian Muslims who choose to stay in India after partition, etc. Akshay Kumar shares the spotlight with the players of the hockey team, led by the Emperor (Kunal Kapoor), Imperial Ali Shah (Vineet Kumar Singh), the royal family of Raghubir Pratap Singh (Amit Sadhu), Himmat Singh (Sunny Kaushal), and the team we can trust.
Character Development
In the form of a royal, Raghubir shows class and ego in his role. Dare is confident as a turban-wearing player. It is nice to see Kunal Kapoor as the emperor because he trains the team for the Olympics. Although we get to watch Akshay Kumar in most parts because he is facilitating the film’s progress, other artists get to shine as well. Backstories of the players could have been given more screen time; however, the film is not about them at all – it’s about India. There is an attempt to highlight patriotism in the film; the film talks about the 200 years of harassment that Indians faced in the hands of the British, multiple times. And not to mention, the thick Bengali accent is shown perfectly in this movie.
Rima Kagti seems effective enough to give us a dynamic film, even if it seems far from reality. Kumar plays a completely fictional character Tapan, which is closely related to Indian hockey. During the Second World War, the ‘British Indian’ hockey magicians, under Chand, did well in the 1936 Olympics (in the movie, we see a character playing Hitler stomp out of the stadium), when the Indian freedom struggle was at its peak. Later, the nightmares of the Partition separated the hockey team as well.
Analysis
The film may remind you of Sharukh’s ‘Çhak De! India’. Despite conditions such as play, drama, hockey federation politics, Indian intervention, and team players involving themselves in groups according to their states, in the end all the players coming together as a team to make the country proud. There may be slight flaws, but ‘GOLD’ is made up of small moments that will warm your heart. Initially, in the first few minutes of the film, India defeats the Nazis with the team name as ‘British India’. Also, there is a Parsi gentleman who facilitates things between Tapan and his boys amongst whom is the nervous Thakur (sadh), and a young Sadar (skills).
The screenplay is beautifully written with the right amount of exciting scenes that lead up to the grand finale. It is not that Akshay is not complete. He immerses himself in the role; although there are many scenes with Akshay and his wife and the ones that show his character development. However, the film focuses its attention on the game and players.
What Is To Be Avoided
Some unnecessary song-and-dance that slow down pace of the film could have been avoided. Despite such problems, the film is worth the watch, some well-done comedy, skirmish between the players, and the emerging ends. When the ‘Tiranga’ rose in the film, I got very excited.
The last 30 minutes in any sports movie are important and ‘Gold’ plays according to this rule. It provides endless nail-biting sequences with the powerful drum sounds, which connect to a high-octane climax. We know the story line, we know mountaineering, but still, you cannot help but become a cheerleader. As drama comes out and the Indian national anthem plays, some of the viewers were standing to pay their respect. This is the moment where the film won!
This post was originally published on the author’s blog
Starring: Kamal Hassan, Pooja Kumar, Andrea Jeremiah
Director: Kamal Haasan
Producer: Kamal Haasan, Chandra Hassan
Music Director: Ghibran
Photographer: Shamadat Saiduden, Sanu Vargas
Editor: Mahesh Narayan
After a five years interval, Kamal Haasan’s “Vishwaroopam 2” has finally hit the screens. Let’s see if the film lives up to the hype or not.
Story development
This story continues after the end of the first part, where Visham Ahmed (Kamal Haasan) successfully cheated the terrorist Umar (Rahul Bose) and helped the US Army dismiss a deadly bomb in New York. After successfully completing this mission, one more task has been assigned to him in the UK so far. He leaves for his mission with his wife Nirupama (Pooja Kumar). But much to the shock of Visma, Umar is still alive, and this time there is a big plan in India. The rest of the story is how the discovery progresses, and Visham saves his country.
Strength
There are some adventures in the first half part of the film and the action scenes look well. Rahul Bose is good as the main villain. Waheeda Rehman adds some emotional heft to the film. The romance between Kamal Haasan and Pooja is very good, and his story has been told in an interesting manner. Kamal Haasan performs a brilliant job in the role of a RAW agent like his every movie. He looks dashing at this age and makes action scenes look easy. Pooja Kumar is good as Kamal’s wife. Andrea plays her part as a police officer well, and her action sequences are enjoyable.
Weakness
“Vishwaroopam 2” will be a complete toss for all those who have not seen the first part because it is difficult to understand what is happening with the story in the first half despite it being good. The scenes jump from one set to another and confuse the viewers. There is absolutely no excitement in the second half, and the story becomes predictable. Heavy duty action scenes are often wrapped in haste.
Development
The camera work is top notch, and the locals have been shown in a good light. Coming down to director Kamal Haasan, he has done a disappointing job with the sequel. Production values of the film are decent, but the music is a disaster and seems to be stuck five years ago.
Rather than making it bigger and better, he has just stretched the simple story forward.
Final verdict
There is a lack of contemporary touch in the storyline and description. Those who prefer to watch the legendary Kamal Haasan on the screen after a long time can try this movie, but others can totally go for something else. “Vishwaroopam 2” is a disappointing sequel. It’s confusing, the screenplay isn’t gripping enough, and no amount of popcorn is going to redeem some of the action scenes.
Recently in a tweet, TM Krishna, one of the finest Carnatic musicians of our time, said, “Considering the vile comments and threats issued by many on social media regarding Carnatic compositions on Jesus, I announce here that I will be releasing one Carnatic song every month on Jesus or Allah,” in defiance. I was happy to learn of his resolve to respond to bigotry and communalism with music, and not just any music. Carnatic music has long remained an exclusive ecosystem of Brahmin men and the religiously conservative. I was reminded of a lecture he delivered at Ramjas early this year during the History festival, ‘Had-Anhad.’ I remember being fascinated by his blunt and candid expression of the artist that lived in his music and his frantic appeal to question instead of fawn.
When asked where the outrage against Carnatic singers who sing Christian hymns could be stemming from, Krishna said, “It has always been in sight but now we are seeing an explosion of it. To put it bluntly, since the BJP and the RSS came to power, it has given people the right to be bigoted.” He also said, “The evolution of Carnatic music has been built on upper-caste Hindu nationalism and the community is very conservative.”
During the lecture, too, Krishna spoke at length about his station of privilege as an upper-caste (Brahmin) male within the realm of Carnatic music and how cognizance of this fact became the threshold which led him to confront many uncomfortable political, social, and cultural realities of being a man, a performing artist and a Brahmin.
He seemed bothered by the performative aspect of producing art: how enthralling and seductive it was to be able to enchant an audience through music without bothering about the lyrical content, its connotations and implications. The presence of gender and caste bias and ubiquity of religious devotion as a theme has not been adequately acknowledged and critiqued. He said that it was mostly the case that the performance became the art. There are aspects of repetition, practice, and customization in performance but an epiphany or inspiration that motivates the production of art is experienced only once. As Krishna profoundly puts it, “construction has pre-programmed experience.”
There is a certain strategy, which I wonder if I can call manipulation or distortion, that goes into the performativity of all art forms whether vocal or mute, that traps the artist for the artist becomes desirable and more importantly, endowed with power. Applause energizes the ego. But once these internalised and obscure personal realities are acknowledged and questioned, a larger political and cultural reckoning of art and its artists can occur. The content and elements such as devotion and divinity of Carnatic music, compositions by masters, classicism and even the way it is sung (the format, the audiences and the settings) has been brought under scrutiny by TM Krishna.
During his lecture at Ramjas, pondering on the question of the nature of an artist, he said, “An artist is the one who is open to living in recognition of his multiple identities, questioning them and at the same time allowing the fact of their cohabitation.” He further explored this theme by talking about the multiple truths that get attached to the same piece of content when it is variously performed as a poem, a song or prose and by different entities. The content acquires new, contemporary and diverse meanings, all as real and true as the original. It never remains the same.
This is, perhaps, the romance of the oral tradition. Krishna believes that an individual becomes an artist by virtue of his spirit. His one-hour long performance is defined by how he spends the other twenty-three.
In light of TM Krishna’s tweets, his lecture, and his work as an artist, I am beginning to view him as a ‘social artist’. Cultures of protest must constantly evolve so that their vibrancy, vigour and efficiency can be upheld. Krishna is doing that and at the same time, giving Carnatic music a pulse.
Up until a few months ago, nobody would have been happier at the prospect of a gynocentric film being made in Bollywood than me. The film ‘Veere di wedding’ released about two months ago, on the 1st of June. The filmmakers chose to market this film as a feminist venture, which was released across 2177 screens and ended up becoming a commercial success.
At that time, I did not get a chance to watch the film, but I decided to watch it a few days ago. While the film has gained a lot of popularity among the audiences, I did not find it worthy of the accolades it has received. Veere di wedding is an old wine wrapped in a new bottle. I had sensed the catastrophe when the trailer was first dropped and later when the promotional music video was released which confirmed my suspicion. The promotional music video looked like a shampoo commercial to me.
We have a movie that is based on the idea of camaraderie and companionship among four women. But this movie seems to be a mockery of the grand wedding traditions in India and tries to address some of the problems in the lives of women, through its characters. As the film opens, we’re introduced to four of its characters, Avni (Sonam Kapoor), Kalindi Puri (Kareena Kapoor), Shikha (Swara Bhaskar) and Meera (Shikha Talsania).
Avni(Sonam Kapoor), is an overachieving, ambitious character, who wants to have the cake and eat it too. She is a divorce lawyer and is trying to find a match for herself before she turns thirty. After several failed attempts, she decides to settle for an arranged marriage with a guy of her mother’s choice. Even after being an affluent professional, somehow she feels like a failure for not adhering to the norms of success set for a woman in our society- getting married and embracing motherhood.
Naturally, we also have a designated fat friend in the group, who has put on an extra layer of fat because of ‘pregnancy’. The problem of weight gain otherwise, is not acceptable to the Bollywood standards or our society’s for that matter. She is depicted as a happily married woman with a kid. Swara Bhaskar portrays a character with a problem of drinking and drug addiction, who is going through a divorce with her husband who is a douchebag. She nails the role, her character wears a face of perennial sass for the entire duration of the film.
Finally, the ‘veere’, Kalindi Puri, played by Kareena Kapoor, says yes to a marriage she’s obviously not ready for. This character reminds us of Kabir Dewan (Abhay Deol) from Zindagi Na Milegi Dobara. But, since she’s a girl and her having commitment issues is not acceptable to an Indian audience, she’s given a history to justify this. The film showcases that her problems with marriage just exist in her head, emanated from a failed marriage between her parents. Kareena Kapoor as Kalindi Puri fails to impress overall.
The director has funny ideas of female empowerment. Shashanka Ghosh, who also made the Sonam Kapoor starrer Khoobsurat, has successfully made a female-centric film, but instead of treating women as people, he objectifies them like any other Bollywood film. He has given us a ‘women-centric’ film that caters to all the notions of patriarchy. The women are shown drinking, butt-slapping, visiting strip-clubs and addressing each other as ‘bros’ basically, they are playing a typical male character from Bollywood.
All of this makes the movie nothing but a male’s take on the lives of women. The promo song has these women dancing around in skimpy outfits, like many famous pop-music videos, lip-syncing to the misogynistic lyrics of a male rapper. All clearly done to attract the male audience to the theatre. The filmmakers continue to stick with the stereotypical ‘women-centric cinema’ in India which cannot work without opulent sets and glamorous women. Also, the fact that this movie revolves around the idea of marriage, it is obviously seen as a safe arena for women.
Another problem with this movie is that it trivializes the actual issues in women’s daily lives. None of these women has a white-collar job, except for Avni, which also makes up a sub-plot of the film. It addresses some superfluous problems only to hide behind them. The women are shown drinking, smoking and cruising through life with their petty problems. What started off as maybe a mockery of traditions ends up being a mockery of the lives of these women. The film tries to convey that women have ‘made-up’ troubles in their lives because they don’t have to deal with real-life situations, like being ‘bread-winners’ for instance.
People like to believe such women exist, but I have hardly encountered one in my life. They definitely don’t live among us. This movie may seem like a harmless effort but, a movie like this could have an irrevocable effect on the minds of audiences across the country. Maybe the idea was to make a comedy film, but I don’t understand the director’s sense of humour. The movie is a satire on the ‘big fat Indian weddings’ and the old traditions that Indians hold adhere to and spend crores on them; only for these marriages to end up in separation.
Shashanka Ghosh went overboard with the whole concept, exactly like people who go overboard with their wedding ceremonies. The women did a great job of doing what people usually believe women do best – looking beautiful and not crossing any boundaries. The film doesn’t take itself too seriously and we shouldn’t either. While this film on the outside, can look promising, it is the same old typical Bollywood film.
For the first time in 92 years, Kerala is suffering from a massive calamity. Heavy rains have resulted in overflowing major rivers like Pampa, Bharatapuzha, and Periyar. Due to a rise in water levels, the Idukki dam had to be opened. Over 34 dams and reservoirs had to be opened and 41 rivers overflowed eventually. The districts were given a red alert. Apart from Kollam, Trivandrum, and Kasargode, almost all districts have been heavily affected. Floods and landslides hit populated areas destroying agriculture and infrastructure.
As per current reports, over 370 people have died. More than 2 lakh people have been made homeless and been moved to relief camps. Hundreds are stranded in different sections and most of them don’t have access to food, water and other resources like clothes, medicines etc.
I live in Kochi. I have the privilege of being in a safe area. I have my food and go to sleep peacefully. During all this, I am reminded that there are millions out there, drenched in the rain, looking for something basic like a warm blanket. I use my access to electricity and internet to help as many distress calls as possible by sharing them on Facebook to bring the authorities’ attention to it. If you look at any Keralite’s Facebook page then it is filled with SOS calls. I have friends and family members who are currently in relief camps. Many other friends are doing everything they can to help authorities to reach more people, volunteers who are having sleepless nights.
It is indeed heartwarming to see the unity of people during this crisis. Their selfless attempts to save people and give up their resources for the same. Police, Navy, and reporters are all over the state. KSEB engineers have ensured that there is electricity during this crisis. I kept thinking to myself that disasters bring people together. But at the same time, it brings out the worst in people.
It started with WTF news related to religious fundamentalists requesting people to not donate to Kerala as the state’s population consists of those belonging to a different religion than them.
“Have some beer with beef” was written by someone safe in their home.
“As thousands and thousands of people across the country and the world are trying to mobilize relief efforts for Kerala, and are trying to do their bit in some way – small or big – some people stand out conspicuously with comments that are motivated, simply, by hate.”
On Twitter, I noticed more communal writings. Author and MP Rajiv Malhotra humbly requested that Hindus be helped from ironically, a Christian country.
Several people echoed the same sentiments in abundant numbers.
Some dragged in “love-jihad”.
More folks expressed their insensitivity with their unconditional love for cows.
Various sections have started dragging in Sabarimala controversy with RSS man and RBI official took to Twitter to spew the same.
Supreme court judges may like to see if there is any connection between the case and what is happening in Sabarimala. Even if there is one in a million chance of a link people would not like the case decided against Ayyappan. https://t.co/0k1818QZGU
When Gujarat Earthquake happened in 2001, Civil aviation minister T John from Karnataka, stated that “the Earthquake is god’s wrath due to the mistreatment of Christians”. He was forced to resign. Now, I see the whole linking of Sabarimala in abundant numbers. Agree or disagree, this kind of insensitivity is just both heartbreaking and angering.
Personally, I tried to ignore all this but the number is going up with fake profiles hijacking news threads and distress calls. It is my humble request to these people – If you don’t want to help the people of Kerala then fine. It is up to you and it is not right to force someone to do an action against their will. However, you are causing damage by spewing this amount of communal hatred. No amount of whataboutery and callousness can fill this because, no matter who has done what in the past or what other communities might be doing, doesn’t make this less insensitive. I am sure that there is a trickle of humanity left in you. It could be awakened if you come and see the state of people in the flood-affected areas of Idukki, Wayanad, Aluva, Chalakudy, Pathanamthitta, or if you could see the SOS calls from people across the state. No one stops to check who belongs to which religion or caste.
There is no need for pity or to be extra nice.
Kerala will survive this together with people who see beyond the boundaries and on a daily basis, we get heartwarming messages and help from people. That’s what matters.
If the fundamentalists can’t spare money then the least they could do is spare us from the hatred they have for Kerala as a state, or the culture or what people choose to eat.
I am equally disappointed that the national media did not cover the Kerala floods more aggressively. The Center is yet to declare Kerala floods as a national disaster despite the entire state being affected and neighbouring states of Tamil Nadu and Karnataka facing setbacks. Only a portion of the fund requested by Kerala CM has been allocated by the Center while plenty is spent on statues.
That doesn’t mean that I have lost complete faith in the Centre. I hope that steps will be taken and accelerated. Damage caused by the flood is estimated to take years to repair but the bonds will build the state.
The more people react (even negatively) to your post on a platform like Facebook or Twitter, the more they will show your post to your audience. A regular Facebook post that is not liked, commented on or reacted to by anyone will be shown to a much lower percentage of your network, and that too only those people who are more likely to react. With an extreme or shocking post, the opposite is true.
Is this kind of media doing justice to democracy? My short answer would be “No”. The long answer includes the fact that misinformation abounds on social media. Few bother to check the sources of information, and even if someone disproves something, they are then put under suspicion of being biased. However, can things change? Newspapers, radio, and TV have also published false information. The only difference being that they can be sued for doing so.
On the plus side, social media allows a cause to go viral and force change to happen.
Media has four basic responsibilities as the fourth pillar of democracy: It should tell the truth. It should be unbiased. It should not act to spread propaganda. It should strive towards the moral conditioning of the masses. And the current situation? It fails in every aspect.
Nowadays, many forms of media tell half the truth, and even outright lies. The authenticity of the news is no more guaranteed. The JNU row was an example of how media houses sold lies or half truths. Almost every media group has ideological or political biases. In many cases they are owned by the heads of political parties. If you observe a news programme for even a few minutes you will get to know the political inclination of the channel. These media outlets serve us their prejudice and spread propaganda. We begin to see media trials, because these channels have begun to see themselves as superior to judiciary. In the name of moral policing, every now and then opinion building is served. The average viewer is bombarded with opinion polls and heavily biased talk shows.
Firstly, social algorithms allow fake news stories from untrustworthy sources to spread like wildfire. Many of us just assume that there is a modicum of truth in advertising. We expect this from commercials, but not from politicians and political parties. Occasionally, a political actor gets punished for betraying the public’s trust through their misinformation campaigns. But in the United States “political speech” is completely free from reasonable public oversight, and in most other countries the media organisations and public offices watching politicians are legally constrained, poorly financed, or themselves untrustworthy. Research demonstrates that during the campaigns for Brexit and the US presidency, large volumes of fake news stories, false factoids, and absurd claims were passed over social media networks, often by Twitter’s highly automated accounts and Facebook’s algorithms.
Second, social media algorithms provide a very real structure to what political scientists often call “elective affinity” or “selective exposure”. When offered the choice of who to spend time with or which organisations to trust, we prefer to strengthen our ties to the people and organisations we already know and like. When offered a choice of news stories, we prefer to read about the issues we already care about, from the pundits and news outlets we’ve enjoyed in the past. Random exposure to content is gone from our diets of news and information. The problem is not that we have constructed our own community silos, humans will always do that. The problem is that media networks take away the random exposure to new, high-quality information. This is not a technological problem. We are social beings and so we will naturally look for ways to socialise, and we will use technology to socialise with each other. But technology could be part of the solution. A not-so-radical redesign might occasionally expose us to new sources of information, or warn us when our own social networks are getting too bounded.
The third problem is that technology companies, including Facebook and Twitter, have been given a “moral pass” on the obligations we hold journalists and civil society groups to. Driven by sensationalism and TRP, media house have taken a corporate turn. It’s courtsey of the media house that Kanhaiya kumar and Hardik Patel became overnight celebrities. TRP-generating news is deliberately shown in loops, while more worthy news gets neglected. That’s selective coverage. For example, Assam’s floods did not got the required coverage as at that time Pratyusha’s suicide was telecast for TRP.
Is it not a cruel irony and an affront to the people in general that so much time and resources are spent on such things, and consciously the terrible economic problems, social issues and censored controversies remain unaddressed? Media houses have stooped so low that they are willing to compromise national security and secrecy. In the name of censorship, the government is trying to restrict the flow of information. And the media is bound to resist that. Episodes like blackening the screen or banning a channel have popped up. The Nirbhaya case of 2012 is an example where media’s constructive role was able to generate people’s involvement in the radical reform the country required. But why weren’t innumerable other cases addressed in the same way?
The current media/press is completely a business entity. Their interests towards public welfare is dubious. They can manipulate the facts as they want. They assume nobody will question them, not even the judiciary. They can motivate, influence, and impact all of the pillars of democracy.
Here’s another thing: Bad news sells. They’re called the fourth pillar of democracy because they empower people with information. Especially the information that will make us vote. Of course, when there is press censorship, the news will never be truthful. It will always be one sided. But do we realize its 2018? You cannot curb information, it will find its way out. People in power who are corrupt will be called out. Corruption will become more difficult to accomplish, and will have to be done more covertly. When exposed, corrupt and powerful people will be more likely to face consequences. If the media function without earning bread through ill practices, that’s true press freedom. However, it’s only when those who own the media sources allow it. You can legally have press freedom, but if media is consolidated to the point where very few people control most of the sources, that freedom becomes an illusion. The pros are obvious, to provide a healthy counter balance to the wrath of unchecked power. But those pros assume the press is not in and of itself enthralled in the wrath of its own powers. Freedom of any kind cannot exist without its paradox. A paradox too-loosely applied to the press, and in desperate need of readjustment.
To wit, CNN, as a leading news-centric channel, has literally become smut television, of endless talking-heads without verifiable or meaningful merit endlessly regurgitating their opinions as if it were news. Laced in, supported by, and no doubt ruled by companies promoting endless advertising of toe-nail fungus medicine, and the like. Other news channels follow the same revenue optimisation techniques to compete, instead of reporting news as it happens, when it happens. Indeed, news production has lost its collective mind and merit by trying to be the counter-balance to our law-makers.
Reporters are deemed to have merit, and put on a pedestal, only when their likes or shares on social media reach a certain threshold. This rat-race for populism is based on an agenda quite different from the integrity of the news that matters. Last but not least, as I realized in my own experience with the national (and international) press, with the advent of the internet as its accelerant, the focal point of the press has turned into fast short-form hits, with the shallow description and coverage of consequential events disconnected from a plausible relationship to cause. The press has on the whole become a rebel without a cause.
So yes, I do think the press needs to be held accountable in order to portray, suitably, our elected officials. And we must ensure the press is not as flawed as the US presidency. We have plenty of instruments in our democratic process to hold our media to account. And if not, we better reinvent our constitution which defines and stipulates those controls. The press must be able to speak its mind, like all of us. And let the merit of their wisdom define whether they should be taken serious or not. They have sunken very low, and I am glad they are being challenged. As we all should be.
I have lost my confidence in the press, and I speak with many leaders in their respective line of work who feel exactly like I do.
Let me paraphrase former FBI director James Comey; just because you are talking about something (frequently) doesn’t mean you know what you are talking about. Let us not forget how the press turned Michael Jackson into a villain, we now know he clearly was not.
Editor’s Note: In an interview for the Danish journal POV International, Claus Ankersen speaks to Indian poet Medha Singh, India Editor at The Charles River Journal, and Editorial Board member of the Freigeist Verlag. Here, she discusses her journey through poetry and its place in contemporary times:
Your own practice of poetry.
Poets should be mysterious, I think, and leave the discussion of craft and process to those for whom the former is paramount, and the latter only incidental. You may deduce, that I favour beauty (and meaning), and know that its appropriate understanding is not without mystery. And my sympathies lie there. Sure, I can tell an alexandrine from a tercet, a dactyl from a trochee (though not without recognising that these things are markers of enormous privilege), but that’s useful when one is caught in a sensory nightmare i.e. social occasions abuzz with philistines and charlatans, who can’t roll a joint to save their life.
When I write, I like good stationary, silence and staring out of the window.
Photo taken at the poet’s home.
Young females’ and poetry.
It’s good they’re here. Finally. Although I’m not comfortable with the idea of ‘young’ females. One may refer to them as ‘new voices’, because the space is quite large and youth is a gendered concept, whether you like it or not. A man can stay young till he’s 39-40, and apparently I’m in my prime right now (at 25).
It’s been a good few decades that we’ve had men’s clubs ‘paving the way’ for us, simultaneously keeping us out, not reviewing women’s books (unless we have a foreign degree or are dating them, or their friends). I don’t know if it’s because we (Indians, English speaking India) are simply a culture of subordination given our feudal past, or our minds are still colonised given our colonial one (or both)— fear festering within us; how to break old paradigms, and come into light, not have our peace or integrity chafed along the way.
Although, between us women, at home base, we have to grow away from the politics of mere naming, the move has to be emancipatory, transformative. It’s not enough to say we’re coming out, we’re pointing problems out, this or that needs fixing. What is the point? What happens the day after you come out?
One prefers brazen aestheticism, as opposed to the covert appropriation of women’s emancipation and feminist values, used as a marketing tool, to sell books. If you don’t have the politics, stay out of it, do what you do best. We are as easily corruptible by the promise of power as men are. It’s strange how our struggle has been commercialised, the movement seduced by capital, by pro globalisation and pro liberal values. It’s not helping the larger mass of women as such, especially poets/writers who happen to be women. Even the term ‘woman poet’ sounds akin to ‘poetess’ to my ears. Wildly condescending.
It’s better to be responsible, than a disgrace, better to think of who our poems liberate and exalt, than to think of how to sell books and network. However, the problem really is competing with that old chestnut: the vanguard male poet, kissed by immortality, regardless of his essential character or attitude towards women. Maybe we don’t need to be all that upright (to some degree), yet we need to be incorruptible at the same time. Toeing the line always.
Our poetry is doing well, but the politics is stuttering, caught between the noise of mainstream publishing houses and the sense of fear towards being disproportionately offensive (to the watchful eye of male gatekeepers).
It’s enough sometimes, to be a purveyor of beauty and experience (and perforce, your work becomes a valid expression of female subjectivity, whether or not you want to call yourself a feminist or lay claim to an authentic value) than a call of arms undergirded by facetiousness, and cringeworthy vanity projects.
It’s quite another thing to challenge it substantially, with one’s integrity intact. The thing is, when we make it a point to say, everything we create is us, it’s harder for people to separate Picasso’s or Rodin’s or Woody Allen’s or Roman Polanski’s or Allen Ginsberg’s crimes, from who they were. This is fundamental, a welcome change. I am my work. There you are.
Poetry as democratization, emancipation and empowerment tool.
I don’t think of that as the telos of poetry. Politics, emancipation, freedom and equality struggles reside in the worldly conscience of the individual, where she situated in her place within the hierarchy of the capitalist order, this constitutes her/the subjectivity that confidently moves and absorbs things, and, our intellectual capacity that assimilates the surrounding politics.
Though it plays only a role in and of itself, within the formation of a poetic consciousness.
All that this worldly awareness comprises of, finds its way in poetry, if it needs to. Poetry is entirely futile when it comes to all this, and poetry’s achievements far exceed what is worldly, so it may incidentally flout and challenge varieties of oppression, unless it is consciously trying to do that (especially with regard to LGBTQ issues, or revolutionary poetry, for example), but the larger achievement of poetry is not worldly, or is incidentally so; not at all to me, at any rate. I learnt this from Akhmatova, from Tsvetaeva.
#MeToo poetry in India?
You’ve come to the wrong person to ask for this. I don’t agree with the movement, for the reasons that the focus has to turn away from the survivor to the perpetrator of the violence, survivors should not have to out themselves, the spotlight needs to be on the men who need to be held accountable.
The fact that it took place on social media itself— the nature of that medium is consumptive, we hear rape and molestation stories on the same platforms I’m being sold shoes, cosmetics and penis enlargement schemes. I don’t want to be complicit in the objectification of my own trauma, for others to voyueristically consume it. I don’t think others should either, but really it is their choice.
The thing is, when it comes to something like ‘Nanette’, it’s a brilliantly done work of art and profoundly necessary and pertinent, globally! Yet, at the same time, it really serves the demographic of comparably more emancipated women in first world countries (this is not to say that first world countries are better off than us, we have somethings down, like abortion is legal, and women have always had the right to vote in India) but not everyone has that stage, not everyone is on social media, and not everyone is an American or knows who Alyssa Milano is.
While it masquerades as an all inclusive movement, in India you’d find the handful of english speaking, upwardly mobile men and women, happy to jump on the bandwagon, but what is really happening? Their narratives are now invisiblizing the ones of those who cannot even seek recourse, those whom the movement should really serve, the real disenfranchised people: the dalits, tribals, working class men and women. Who will hear them? Who does?
The development of spoken word?
It’s just another one of those things that first belonged to black people, is now appropriated by white liberals, has become fashionable, and is marketed to the rest of the world as the next radical thing that can challenge the status quo. But it’s futile if it serves capital as opposed to resisting it. Spoken word, by itself can be used to refer to anything: comedy skits, long monologues, rap, poems included.
‘Slam poetry’, in this context, is where the problem is: it started as an angry voice, trembling with indignation, in Harlem as a response to the (mainly white and male) publishing industry, which was, even earlier, a borrowed form, from the Negritude poets of the Carribean.
The Nuyorican jazz club where Mark Smith started to host these evenings, was an avowed socialist, and a construction worker ie a member of the working class. Slam poetry carried with itself a desperation, an angst, pathos and pain, an outcome of, relevant and pertinent to, those that emerge from grossly marginalized groups. Like everything else, it became appropriated by a bunch of white liberals.
Look up Saul Williams and compare him to any (even ‘the best’ people like Sarah Kay), and tell me what you feel about it then.
All art is political. Art expresses what politics doesn’t allow you to. I can’t separate your identity from your parents. You can’t separate India from it’s struggle for Independence. My mother will always be my mother. You won’t feel very nice if white people started pretending tomorrow that ghazals belong to them.
Barring Eminem, most of white rap is A grade garbage. He had an edge because he did something no one had done before in his time ie render the violence of poverty on human life, when you’re white, in rap. Even then, a rap revival only took place with Kendrick in the last decade. The agenda had become grossly materialist, and capitalist, might still possibly be. Like spoken word, it has largely lost sight of what it started out as. In principle, I can’t dignify rap music any further because of how fundamentally sexist it is. In India, it is too new to be considered for debate.
Spoken word is spoken, it can signify rap, comedy skits, monologues, and up till that point it’s fine. When you start with the poetry nonsense it gets to me. Mumbai rap works fine, because it does not deviate from the political purpose of hip hop and speaks truth to power, it is not power appropriating something it does not have a legitimate claim over.
More than poetry being spoken, it’s been sung for much longer in India. We have our own traditions of mushairas, shayiri, hasya kavi, and so on. Liberals talking about make-up and beauty standards does not make me feel anything other than cringe at how badly it’s (normally) written.
When a dominant group takes something from a marginal one, we have a serious problem. Especially if the proprietors, being in positions of power, can’t be faithful to the agenda for which the form was built. The politics is in the very structure of the thing.
Or in the very least be faithful to the agenda: giving marginal narratives, personal or cultural, the visibility they deserve.
Competition is the governing logic of capitalism/neoliberalism. Poetry does not belong there. Some contest that art forms don’t belong to groups, and they might be right to some degree, but they’re definitely privileged to an even greater one, that they can afford this ignorance. But methods and aesthetics do belong to groups, you can’t take that away from them, if you’re not going to do something better to it, while acknowledging its roots at the same time.
Let me put it this way, Blake, Yeats, Keats, Wordsworth, Heaney, Szymborska, Atwood, Rimbaud, Eliot, Pound, Simic, Mandelstam, Tsvetaeva, or Akhmatova weren’t outcomes of rap battles and slam poetry, and my skin crawls to type those things out in the same sentence. Poetry has a very deep relationship with politics, and often, the form has helped in parsing out what belongs to who.
Regional poetry and languages.
Most people writing in English can’t give you a good answer, some can speak about the languages they themselves work between, a lot of us are bilingual poets, and multilingual in general, but India is a very particular situation. We have 24 official languages. No one knows that many, so you have to interview quite a few of us to get a full picture. I was born into a household of two very loved Hindi poets, my father was a Marxist poet named Pankaj Singh (1948-2015), and my mother, still very much alive and writing, is Dr. Savita Singh, so my exposure to that world of writing has informed my own writing in English, certainly.
I’d say there is a greater awareness and a better sense of location and situation in poetry being written in Hindi than in English, but it’s all market, economy, neoliberalism and what these forces do to our identities in the end, right? There are writers who choose to leave the country and think it’s fair to call that exile, play the brown card abroad when they do nothing, not even bother to stay, in the country and engage with the space, except maybe with mainstream publishing houses. They pander to global capital, and network very well. So yeah, poets writing in English definitely lack the sense of responsibility that those writing in regional languages possess.
Though, if I am to be completely honest, Hindi and Urdu can’t really be called regional languages as such, they are spoken in wide swathes of Northern India, and serve as a bridge between people from different states. They’re really very young, compared to the rest, and so it goes.
Poetry as community building artform.
I don’t have a right to answer that question, because there are people like Abhijit Khandkar who are doing some great work in Delhi around Dalits, Manjiri Indurkar and Scherezade Siobhan in Mumbai, work on mental health issues, poets like Suvir Kaul have familiarised us with Kashmir and brought us closer to its environs; there are numerous people who can give you an amazing account of how all this is unfolding in India. I’m mainly involved with literary presses, and as such, my stint with Coldnoon, was extremely rewarding and I got to interact with a slew of poets, and writers, even lay audiences I had never known before. Philip Nikolayev, a Russo-American, our most beloved Sanskrit speaking Indophile, has set up very large communities on social media, which have facilitated conversations among the takers and participants of poetry.
The most impressive space today, however, is the Indian Cultural Forum run by Githa Hariharan. I recommend any and everyone to have a go at it.
A few recommendations of contemporary female Indian poets.
I’ll tell you who I like to read these days: Nandini Dhar, Manjiri Indurkar, Gertrude Lamare, Rukmini Bhaya Nair (not a new or young voice at any rate, but she deserves a mention, she broke the ground for us to walk on), Sohini Basak, Anindita Sengupta, Ranjani Murali, Mona Zote, Sampurna Chattarji, Mani Rao, Sridala Swami, Urvashi Bahuguna, Aditi Angiras (Angiras is working with Akhil Katyal on the first queer anthology to come out of the south asian region, be on the lookout for that).
Tell me about being a woman in india? About being a female poet? How do you see the state of affairs? Where is it going? What are the most important challenges?
Rape-culture? Harassment-culture – and the patriarchal system.
It’s everywhere, in Bollywood, in the tradition of arranged marriage, in the clear demarcation of what women can study (liberal arts) and what men ought to (Engineering, business), in our religious discourses, in catcalling, eve teasing, in the state refusing to punish the eight men who kidnapped, brutally raped and murdered an 8 year old girl on her way to school, in a Hindu temple in Kashmir this year, because she belonged to a muslim, tribal community. It’s in our state rhetoric, it’s in
mainstream politics, it’s in the workplace, on the street, you know, regular stuff. Same things that happen in Ireland, America.
Photo taken at the poet’s home. Courtesy of Medha Singh.
Young population – where is it going? Do you envision change? What will the roles of poets be in this? The next century will be female, it is said.
No, it won’t be. Though, I think the rise of socialism among milennials in the US is ever so pleasing, and when that kind of unrest emerges from the heart of the erstwhile empire, there is hope. You now how revolutions spread, and I hope they work the same way here. Though, to be honest, I live in a place crawling with Delhi’s Nazi youth. There is literally no hope for us. While there is a highly commendable resistance from the students of Jawaharlal Nehru University, all other universities are in great peril. The state is wrecking our institutions, our bureaucracy, everything.
People, millennials my age, actually believe we need a dictatorship, which is frightening, seeing as to how fascist rhetoric is flying around everywhere, and the rumours, that the current party might impose emergency rule, would clear off any possibility for the next elections to even be held. Hindutva has been around since 1925, they’ve always wanted a ‘Hindu Rashtra’ (a hindu nation), as opposed to the constitutionally secular state we have today, and Gandhi himself was assassinated by a member of the fascist party, the RSS (Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh). We’re actually under the sway of a proto-fascist leader, and there is an enormous pressure on the youth to bail us out, as we are the largest demographic in the country. Our struggle is vastly different from the global struggle towards emancipation in the western world, whether as women, or millennials.
Mind you, this party that I mention, the BJP, has an elected chief minister in India’s largest state, Uttar Pradesh, who publicly declared that muslim women could and should be dug out of their graves and raped to be taught a lesson. It’s led by a man, our prime minister, who was found responsible for a a muslim genocide in 2002, by a sting operation conducted by Thelma Magazine.
I don’t know what’s going to happen, and I’m not one to be swayed by soundbites like ‘the future is female’. I like to look at facts, and ground reality.
No one emancipated until working class, tribal, and muslim women are. That is where the true reflection of any society is. First world countries like to show off to us, as to how many opportunities women have, but I don’t know how much they know about how muslim women lead a life in their societies, that are so grotesquely and historically islamphobic.
I want change, but you’re talking to a socialist, who is an anomaly and a disgrace in the current times, and if we are to believe the hooligans who run our government, I’m very much ‘anti-national’.
How will this play out in India, do you think?
It is playing out. There is bloodshed. I have severe anxiety, and social discomfort because I read the news everyday. I’ve stopped going out, and meeting people, because they seem unfazed by everything that troubles me. I have few friends. And I think, any sensitive person who lives in India has become this way. Others, are being subjected to severe oppression, and those that don’t care are waiting for the day, albeit begrudgingly, when they might have to shake hands with a fascist state for personal survival. No one is safe. And we all know it. Too much depends on the next election.
Please offer the danish readership a favourite stanza or two-liner.
“With the farming of a verse
Make a vineyard of the curse,
Sing of human unsuccess
In a rapture of distress;
In the deserts of the heart
Let the healing fountain start,
In the prison of his days
Teach the free man how to praise.”
—W.H. Auden
The interview was first published here, in POV International. Featured image courtesy of Medha Singh.
The country mourned the demise of ex-prime minister Atal Bihari Vajpayee on August 16. Apart from that, the death of hundreds in the unprecedented, highly catastrophic Kerala floods shook the nation.
But very strangely and awkwardly, several youngsters of this country are not sad about either of the two. Rather, they’re showing hatred and communalism.
Hatred For Vajpayee: Never Seen Before Satisfaction For His Death
Awkwardly disconcerted in their hatred against the late former PM, Twitter was loaded with some ugly comments on Vajpayee, calling him a terrorist organization founder, communalist, mass murderer and what not!
Some didn’t think he did anything good as a prime minister and accused him of killing India’s secularism.
This young gentleman came to the apparent rescue of those who don’t understand and despised Vajpayee of giving all his speeches in Hindi.
We Understand Politics. But Hatred Even For Kerala?
There is absolutely no point in showing inhumane behaviour towards a state struck with a disaster which has left it in shatters.
Eating beef brought the floods to the Christians and Muslims of Kerala – youngsters now
Some spoke about floods coming unto Kerala due to them eating beef with brazen assurance. They attribute the floods to divine wrath directed towards disrespecting Sabarimala and their God.
If beef was the reason for floods, many places not only in India but around the world too should drown in water. Someday soon these young people will come up saying eating chicken causes earthquakes.
Are we millennials really getting influenced by one-sided stories and wrong ideologies? Maybe we are taking too much liberty of the fact that the youth is allowed to speak more than anyone else in this country and social media is an added bonus to the hate talk.
Most of the Vajpayee hate comments came from a mindset that he never supported any non-Hindu and made BJP a totally Hindu Communalist party.
No exact proof says so, but our generation has a very unique way of adapting a stubborn mindset based upon what they hear, and not what the truth is.
This ugly side of the youngsters of India is really disheartening to see, and comments made by them are even more difficult to digest.
With all the chaos in the academic rhetoric about the Pondy Lit Fest, the event, on its the first day, proved to be the perfect launch pad for staunch right-wing Hindutva politics.
All the sessions included lopsided controversial arguments, which kept on accusing the Supreme Court and all the non-conformist media houses in the country. The vision of the event was “Bharat Shakti” and as the name suggested the fest turned out to be covertly justifying Modi-led NDA government’s activities. The discussions on the upcoming elections were regarding how the BJP can further saffronise the northern and eastern belts of the country and make inroads in the south. The session named ‘Mission 2019’ concluded with the opinion that the election is going to be fought on the dichotomy of “politically stable government of Narendra Modi or the politically unstable government of the opposition.”
However, the session on Triple Talaq and Section 377 had people speaking as so called ‘liberals’ but what the panel failed to address is the elitist form of the LGBT movement and further failed to justify how the ‘Hash tag’ movement failed to permeate into rural India.
In the final session of the day where the much debated politics of mandir/ masjid was to be addressed, it was marred by lack of speakers or panelists in standing up for the Masjid. It was almost an eye-wash as the speakers gave vague statements and mocked Audrey Truschke, and further made references about Marxist Historian Irfan Habib’s works.
Another panelist Shubhrasta went on to criticize the government for not fulfilling the promise of making Ram Janmabhumi and thereby strengthening the jumla “Mandir wahi banaenge”. The panel alleged all opposing parties right from the judiciary to the media houses as leftists.
Panel moderator Gautam Chikermane said, “All anti-Modi media houses have journalists who come from either AISA or AISF.” The event, as on the first day, proved to be an opening of Hindutva Politics in this region of the country when it is devoid of leaders (both opinion and political) like Jayalalitha and Karunanidhi.
It should also be noted that there was no reference to the Kerala floods in the fest.
With the floods wreaking havoc in the state of Kerala, a professor at a reputed educational institution expressed her opinion on her Facebook profile like many others.
But what differed was her impractical perspective towards the issue. Her FB post on August 18 read ‘Why is Mother Nature so ferocious and angry? Any connection with RSS workers’ murders? (sic)’
This inflammatory remark was more than enough to spark a furore on social media. Within minutes, she was slammed as being insensitive and unsympathetic by many. It’s also interesting to note that a majority of those who criticised were her past students. According to their comments, it seems that this is not the first time she’s doing so. Because most of them accused her of moral policing and spreading right-wing propaganda while teaching at the classroom.
However, she cloaked her remark under the guise of sarcasm through another post on the following day.
With Teacher’s Day approaching soon, we must realise that it is necessary to stress the importance of moralistic education among the younger generation. Dr. APJ Abdul Kalam once said, “Teaching is a very noble profession that shapes the character, calibre, and future of an individual.” The sad fact is that even the converse is possible if the baton is passed into the wrong hands.
Recently, a Kerala man was fired from his company for passing an insensitive comment on the same issue.
At times when love and support are needed at large, is it necessary to spread hate like this?
From Varanasi in Uttar Pradesh to Chhatarpur and Bundelkhand in Madhya Pradesh, Khabar Lahariya caught up with all the Bakr-Eid buzz. From discussions about the priciest goats to the tastiest sewaiyaan, here’s what all the mandiwalas and their customers had to say.
We run a Facebook page which serves as an archival project to document online harassment faced by women. Our purpose is to make people aware of the nature of abuse that women encounter in online spaces. It’s not really about individual women, it’s about carrying on the old tradition of gendered abuse and oppression and bringing it in the cyberspace. We share information on pages, groups, individual content, comments, messages which are a form of harassment and ask people to report and share it further to create awareness.
We share experiences of individual women who reach out to us and post screenshots of messages, comments from individuals or groups targeting them. These posts include abuse ranging from unsolicited dick pics, lewd comments to sexually violent vitriol calling for further violence and encouraging other users to partake in the attack. In our page, we do not crop out or blur the images we post as we intend to condemn, seek support, and draw attention to hate speech and harassment.
We recently received a notification/warning from Facebook asking us to review our content as it went against their ‘community standards’ along with a message, whether we would like to unpublish our page. A few days later, we received another warning to remove objectionable content or the page will be taken down. This accompanied with a ban from posting anything for a period of 48 hours.
Apparently, some individuals had an issue with our content and they reported us. I am sure if we do not highlight the comments, messages, profiles or pages that actually are abusive we would not violate the fragile facebook community standards which ironically, have never been violated by crass and vulgar language filled with graphic violence most of the time in rustic Hindi reported by us.
Some individuals are taking advantage of the distance and anonymity that social media offers. They hide behind fake IDs to send hate on its merry way to perturb an individual without any concern about the consequences in their personal lives. Meanwhile, we keep getting blocked for posting trigger words like “#MenAreTrash”. It’s funny it doesn’t work the other way around; you won’t get blocked for writing women are trash or feminists are trash try it! Our page got reported for posting screenshots of disgusting dick pics(blurred) with lewd messages and men who actually sent them did not get any warning.
We have encountered repeat offenders, they don’t get punished and continue to invoke skin-crawling disgust for the unsuspecting victims of their exhibitionism. Guess we were wrong in calling it a form of sexual harassment and questioning a man’s right to send non-consensual images of their genitalia to strangers on the internet. It is no form of greeting, they have no right to blindside a woman! Imagine flashing to someone in public and getting away with it! And I am calling this a gendered problem because I have never heard of a woman sending vulva shots or nauseating texts filled with vulgarity to random strangers online.
I have enough experience with Facebook’s ‘reporting’ of profiles, posts, comments and direct messages that are offensive and filled with hate. And from my experience, I can safely say that it’s not as serious and useful as it should be or might appear. This social media platform is failing many of us every day as the death threats and rape threats, misogyny, the unprecedented hate and the abusive language doesn’t go against any of its community standards; it’s not ‘credible enough’ to be taken seriously.
Moderating huge, fast moving social media sites is not easy but allowing aspirational threats and violent language in the name of ‘freedom of speech’ is creating a hostile environment for many. It slowly leads to the withdrawal of especially women and minority groups from the cyberspace. It is disappointing to see hateful speech targeted at someone being glorified, passed on and boasted about with no fear of repercussions whatsoever.
The most disturbing part of this trend is that the people, who actually have something to say that challenges stereotypes are the ones who are targeted the most. Women receive almost similar and interchangeable messages and comments (read rape and death threats). No matter what supposedly provoked the haters, the context does not matter and the nature of abuse inherently remains the same. What angers me the most is the perpetual disregard for the abusive comments and messages that are in Hindi or any regional language for that matter by Facebook.
I honestly find the ‘’Does not violate our community standards’’ messages distasteful; I find the algorithms meant to filter content indifferent and biased. For example, women’s (also read as not men’s) nipples are almost as bad as unintended pornographic exposure, therefore it’s deemed best to ban any image of nipples without understanding context. What’s acceptable should be about norms and expectations and not just laws. This problem is way bigger than just the grey areas where people disagree, as it tends to affect personal lives negatively.
It is more complex and the ignorance just because of regional language use is making it easy for some people to abuse and hide. This should not be justified in any manner. Few people on the social media platforms have been acting as cults, targeting groups they do not approve of and attacking them. We as a society need to stand up against these haters by supporting each other and identifying what our community finds acceptable and harmful instead of letting these haters dictate us.
It is annoying as well as disheartening to see a bunch of teenagers, right-wing men in their forties and fifties, the proud ‘bhagwa-rakshaks’ and the countless torchbearers of the newest wave of flashy nationalism, deciding what is acceptable in our society and counter everything with an overwhelming amount of hate. Critiquing a government has come to mean criticising the nation and different women expressing their sexuality has come to mean they are ‘attention seeking whores’ wishing rape.
Facebook community standards can be broken down into six sections: Violence and Criminal Behaviour, Safety, Objectionable Content, Integrity and Authenticity, Respecting Intellectual Property and Content Related Requests. This Social Media platform especially boasts about how it removes content even if it does not breach community standards if it falls under their ‘Bullying Policies’. Also, how they encourage expression and create a safe environment, with the help of their experts in fields such as technology and public safety.
How much of it actually works is questionable, as Facebook is not exactly allowing content which is important despite its ‘breaching community standards’ like it claims. People keep getting trolled for their race, ethnicity, nationality, caste, sex, gender identity and disability on this global platform. Facebook is a diverse community and people are going to have different ideas about what is okay to share and what is agreeable. It is important to understand this.
Facebook is responsible for keeping it’s community safe and should feel accountable, given the amount of popularity the site has and how it prides itself to be a great debate chamber. They have the resources to invest in better policies and more region-specific guidelines to keep this site safe. They should empower people to report any content they feel threatened with or find offensive. If you build technology, you should feel responsible for how it is used. Being the richest and biggest social media company, it should be a priority for them to implement proper community standards to keep its users safe.
Loving someone deeply makes you feel vulnerable. Love someone deeply, and your heart is bound to get broken into pieces. Love ends up intoxicating the mind. It makes you feel miserable. The beginning of love is unpredictable, while the end of it is sad, but all that happens in between makes the experience worthwhile and pretty much unforgettable.
Mani Ratnam’s 1998 romantic thriller ‘Dil Se’, a film starring Shahrukh Khan, Manisha Koirala, and Preity Zinta brings to light the extent of fragility and emotional turmoil one goes through when one falls in love. The film, shot across picturesque locations such as Assam, Leh, Himachal Pradesh, Kerala, and Bhutan, explores the seven stages of love mentioned in ancient Arabic literature.
These are:
Hub (attraction)
Uns (infatuation)
Ishq (love)
Akidat (trust)
Ibadat (worship)
Junooniyat (obsession and madness)
Maut (death)
Shahrukh Khan’s character Amar goes through all these stages after he meets Meghna (Manisha Koirala). At a time when Bollywood films focused excessively on foreign locations and baseless romance, Dil Se ‘dared’ to throw light on an issue as sensitive as the insurgency in India’s Northeast. The film is painted with a multitude of human emotions, right from love, innocence, and fragility to pain, anguish, and vulnerability.
What Makes The Film Stand Out?
A Simple And Innocent Love Story:
No exaggeration, no fancy outfits, no heavy piles of makeup, no fancy locations, just pure romance. The film has countless traces of innocence. Amar meets a mysterious woman on a rainy night at the Haflong railway station to catch the Barak Valley Express. She asks him to bring a cup of tea, but when he returns with two cups of tea, Amar witnesses the woman boarding a train along with two to three male passengers.
Amar meets Meghna yet again. The rest of the story deals with various encounters between the two characters that end up bringing them closer, to a point where they find it hard to live without each other. Amar returns to Delhi after completing his assignment in the area, but as luck would have it, their paths cross again.
The film, with its tight and gripping story line, doesn’t go off-track even once. Making a film that showcases he seven stages of love mentioned in the Arabic literature came as a breath of fresh air at a time when Bollywood producers were busy making masala romantic and action films.
Soulful Music:
Dil Se‘s music has undoubtedly been one of the prime reasons behind the film’s growing popularity in recent years. The soulful compositions of AR Rahman, backed by heart-warming lyrics by Gulzar sahib sound like poetry in motion. Right from ‘Chaiyya-Chaiyya‘ to ‘Ae Ajnabee‘ and ‘Satrangi Re‘, the film’s soundtrack is ornamented by a wide range of emotions.
The Song ‘Chaiyya-Chaiyya‘, sung by Sapna Awasthi and Sukhwinder Singh, has been filmed on a moving train and talks about a man’s love for his partner. The song borrows a lot of words from the Urdu language in order to paint a colorful imagery. Some of the lines from the song are as follows:
“Woh yaar hai jo khushboo ki tarah, Woh jiski zubaan Urdu ki tarah Meri shaam raat, meri kainaat Woh yaar mera saiyaa saiyaa”
Other songs such as Jiya Jaley, Ae Ajnabee, and Satrangi Re were no less popular and became superhits overnight.
Another major feature of the soundtrack is that the songs blend effortlessly into the film. No song looks out of place. All of these songs are popular till date. The popularity of Dil Se‘s music album has grown by leaps and bounds over all these years and is expected to grow even further in the times to come.
Poetry In Motion:
I remember Sabyasachi Chatterjee telling Manisha Koirala’s character, “Ishq mein nasha hota hai, yeh hamaare liye nahi hai.”
This is one of the countless dialogues that sound pleasing to the years. Tigmanshu Dhulia has handled the dialogues with perfection. The sheer rawness of the dialogues adds significantly to the beauty. Most of the dialogues sound like poetry to the ears.
Tackling a Sensitive Issue to Perfection:
At a time when producers and directors shied away from throwing light on sensitive issues such as terrorism and political instability in India’s Northeast, Dil Se broke all the barriers and threw ample light on the reasons behind the insurgency. The atrocities inflicted by the army on the citizens were also portrayed skillfully.
Despite having a tight and gripping story line, great music, and excellent performances, the film failed to garner positive reviews in India when it had released. Most people disliked the film simply because ‘Ladki toh terrorist thi”. Two decades down the line, the film remains one of parallel cinema’s finest offerings.
In response to Ms Anahita Nanda’s article ‘How TM Krishna Is Changing Carnatic Music By Acknowledging His ‘Male Brahmin’ Identity’, I would like to offer my considered opinion. If you haven’t read her article, I strongly recommend you read it first before proceeding with mine.
The insinuation that “Male Brahmin identity” matters a lot in Carnatic music (I will use the abbreviation CM) does not seem very logical and contemporary to me.
Let’s address the gender aspect first. Yes, in the past, women were discouraged from performing CM in public. But in those times this was true of any pursuit that involved public appearance, so it would be unfair to specifically target CM as an art form or a group for this. Women artistes were then also considered by some as inferior, particularly in laya (rhythmic aspects). The “male bastion” was breached in the first half of the previous century by the irresistible troika of DK Pattammal, MS Subbulakshmi and ML Vasanthakumari, as well as by other outstanding artistes like NC Vasanthakokilam, Brinda and Mukta, etc. All of them were, and still are, regarded highly in CM for their music. For that matter, Veena Dhanammal (1867-1938) was highly regarded for her musical scholarship and tradition, and her veena-playing, even back then. Much water has flown down the Kaveri since, and today we have a large number of highly regarded women in the field, performing around the world, winning awards (including the coveted Sangeeta Kalanidhi) and teaching. So, to paint TM Krishna (whose music I am a big fan of) or any other contemporary artiste as a modern-day mascot of women’s emancipation into CM seems misplaced. Those who claim that gender discrimination exists in CM of today’s times should point out specific instances, and the next logical step should be to identify if it such examples represent a general malaise or are isolated cases of discrimination that one can find in every field.
Even outside of Carnatic music or in other art forms like Bharatanatyam, the South Indian Brahmin (SIB) community has, in general, and despite its undeniable conservatism, over the last few decades been relatively much more forward-thinking and liberal when it comes to bettering the status of women. It can safely be said that this community is well above the Indian average. Be it in terms of education, pursuit of career, choice of life-partner, property inheritance and so on, I think there would be few communities in Indian society that are on par or better. Pretty much every SIB I know today has one or more instance(s) of inter-caste, inter-faith, inter-state (two states!) or inter-national marriage in his or her extended family. You will not see instances of honour killing or ostracism in this community; more often than not, in such cases, you will find that parents and relatives have made peace with their children’s decision (even if they initially had, or might still have, reservations).
Next, let’s look at the bogey of “Brahmin-domination” in CM. I would humbly refer to CM as Brahmin-cultivated (a positive reference) rather than Brahmin-dominated (a term which offers negative vibes to anyone other than a statistician). Yes, it is true that a majority of CM performers, organizers and rasika-s are from the SIB community. But that is largely on account of their dedication to the art and not because of a conspiracy to suppress others from getting in and doing well. Artistes from other communities who have embellished CM are several in number; at the certain risk of missing many important names, here is a brief list: a galaxy of Nadaswaram giants led by TN Rajarathnam Pillai, Sembanarkoil brothers, Karaikurichi Arunachalam, Sheikh Chinnamoulana; Veena Dhanammal, her descendants and proteges (Brinda, Mukta, Balasaraswati, T Sankaran, T Viswa); MS Subbulakshmi (though her fortuitous marriage to a Brahmin, rather than a “more than supportive husband”, is bandied about as a necessary step in her success); Kanchipuram Naina Pillai and Chittoor Subramaniam Pillai; laya maestros such as Palani Subramania Pillai, Dakshinamurthi Pillai and Haridwaramangalam Palanivel; and in more recent times, TM Thyagarajan, Neyyatinkara Vasudevan and KJ Yesudas (whose guru was the orthodox Brahmin Chembai Vaidyanatha Bhagavatar, who demonstrated exemplary broad-mindedness in taking KJY under his wings).
If the number of CM performers and students from non-Brahmin communities has declined in the recent past, it is symptomatic of the general decline in interest in and dedication to the art in society, whereas the preponderance of Brahmins in CM is on account of their stubborn and painstaking efforts to keep the art form alive by making their children learn and appreciate the art, patronizing the artistes, running organizations and sabha-s devoted to the art, and so on. It is unfortunate that somehow Brahmins are seen as deliberately dominating the field at the expense of others. The reasons for the “domination” are to be found elsewhere, not in conspiracies or supremacist tendencies.
Thus, much as I appreciate and savour the music of TM Krishna, I am not in agreement with his activist side which I feel is needlessly confrontational. His views would be far more palatable if they were somewhat balanced. For instance, saying that “while a lot of positive things have happened in the CM world that showcase inclusion of women and communities other than Brahmins, I’d like to see more of it” would generate more positive vibes than saying something to the effect that “we’ve been in the dark ages all this while and now we need to bring about drastic change.”
Now allow me to share my thoughts on the recent controversy over the issue of Carnatic vocalists lending their voice to Christian songs and the like. I believe that at a deep level, spirituality is a very personal thing and how one chooses to connect with the Supreme is a private matter. Indic thought has always accommodated an infinitely large number of approaches and viewpoints, and inherently supports cultural and religious diversity in an atmosphere of mutual respect. Hence, under reasonably ideal circumstances, I do not personally have a problem with a Carnatic song in praise of Jesus or Allah, per se.
The real reason behind the opposition that we’ve seen from many quarters is the current context in Indian society, where there is considerable concern about many parallel trends that are seen as threats to our demographic composition in general, and the Hindu community in particular. There is genuine concern about rampant conversion by some aggressive and foreign-funded evangelists using insidious means in many pockets of the country, in the name of religious freedom and secularism. There is genuine concern about vote-bank politics pursued by the Grand Old Party and many regional parties that has resulted in massive problems of illegal immigration and demographic change. There is genuine concern about the distortion of history and the national narrative by left-funded historians and media over the decades since Independence. There is real disgust at the treatment of Hindu religious leaders (whom mainstream media seeks to disparage and paint with a broad brush even if the wrong-doers among them do not form a percentage any bigger than that amongst other religions), denigration of Hindu symbols and practices, and the appeasement of certain minority groups by political parties. Secularism is perceived as the eternal burden of only the Indic religionists, because the mutual respect that we want to accord others is not reciprocated. This is not to paint all Christians and Muslims with the same brush; I do believe there is a good number of them who genuinely believe in pluralism and mutual respect, and are least interested in the agenda of converting the nation into their faith. But denying that there are mischievous agencies with political and institutional patronage that pursue undesirable agendas and use dishonest and disguised means would amount to falsehood and brushing problems under the carpet.
These are real concerns on the ground, not some made-up and exaggerated fantasies. The victory of the BJP in 2014 was a fallout of this ground reality. I am in utter disagreement with the self-proclaimed champion of secularism, the left-liberal camp, that seeks to put the cart before the horse in claiming that it is the victory of the BJP that has led to fear-mongering in the Hindu community and thereby has fuelled fanaticism and fundamentalism (or, as some misguided figures like to take the liberty of saying, saffron extremism or saffron terrorism). Is it too far-fetched to conclude the BJP and RSS are probably giving voice to a majority whose concerns have been long ignored and side-stepped across the political spectrum? They may well have flaws; but in the absence of a better alternative, why will people not vote for them?
Let’s face it: fringe elements, abusive trolls and over-the-top reactions will always be there in every camp. Particularly in today’s digital age where everything is out in the open, and where most “posts and shares” are heat-of-the-moment reactions to a particular incident or comment, in a certain context, and do not by any measure reflect the sum total of a person’s or a community’s outlook. And the internet makes it possible for something happening in one corner of the globe, or one person’s post, to spread like wildfire in no time – what with thousands of people itching to post a reaction as soon as they receive something. It takes maturity to hold back and respond after due consideration, but alas, in today’s fast-paced world that maturity is hard to find across the board. Likewise, it takes some effort and maturity to dig beyond the surface and understand nuance, rather than painting the world black and white. This is where I wish TMK would look beyond the “vile comments and threats” (which are certainly deplorable) and attempt to address the meat of the problem in a non-confrontational way. Someone of his stature as a musician and intellectual need not dignify the fringe by reacting to it. If someone incites or threatens violence, the police must be informed and the law must take its course.
Like pretty much every classical art form in India, Carnatic Music – like it or not – has been seen not merely as an art form but also a spiritual sAdhanA in itself – and this has been so for centuries. The great compositions of CM are not only rich in musical ideas, but are also suffused with bhakti. On account of this, it is but natural that a large portion of CM rasika-s associate CM with a certain dhArmik tradition; even rAga AlApanA, which is the melodic exploration of a rAga and is bereft of lyrics (sAhitya), is often identified with the various rasa-s or moods that accentuate a bhakta-s relationship with the Divine. Understandably, they find it difficult to strip CM of its divinity and Hindu roots. Those who think CM should be secularized and lend itself to a wider canvas are certainly entitled to their views and are free to put in efforts in that direction, but at the very least they should empathize with and respect differing opinions, rather than brand them as fanatical and results of BJP/RSS-driven indoctrination! So much for freedom of expression!
If a Christian or Muslim genuinely attracted to Carnatic Music desires to compose and sing songs based on the Carnatic idiom in praise of his/her object of worship, there is absolutely no problem with it. But when a popular Carnatic musician (say XYZ) is sought to be roped in, and the publicity poster for the event announces “Might of Jesus, featuring XYZ”, it does touch a raw nerve when placed in the prevailing context of Hindu concern. Maybe the organizers’ intentions are completely honourable, but the average Hindu cannot be faulted for suspecting, in a corner of his or her mind, that CDs of the event might be used for proselytization activities. Yes, the peerless KJ Yesudas and Sheikh Chinnamoulana did perform traditional Carnatic kriti-s composed in praise of Hindu deities. But none of their concerts or cassettes or CDs were labelled “The Might of Krishna” or “The Greatness of Hinduism” featuring KJ Yesudas or Chinnamoulana. No Hindu went about, or even remotely thought about, trying to persuade Christians or Muslims that because your guy is singing in praise of Rama and Krishna, Hinduism is better than your faith and you should consider converting.
In conclusion, I hope we can have a nuanced debate on this instead of indulging in simplistic binary delineations and portraying this is a “liberal versus fanatic” issue. It is not. In every free society, there will be a left camp and a right camp – that is the very nature of humanity. Unfortunately, the fringe elements on either side dominate public discourse today. It is high time the moderate elements in both camps isolate the fringe, and instead talk to each other in a cordial, empathetic and mutually respectful manner on these and other matters. And at the end of the day, it is perfectly alright – and civilized – to agree to disagree.
I was one of those little kids who was humbled by art. From my childhood itself, I adored two things: one is the beauty of art, and another is the beauty of honesty, which my dad taught me. I always combined them, I have drawn several scenarios in my mind till now. I am afraid of drawing my imagination wrong, so I recreate some easy works, which makes much more sense to me.
So now I am a graduate, I have this wonderful friend with whom I shared my imaginations and desire for art. He introduced me to Vincent Van Gogh. When I read about this artist, I was a little confused. But then I saw his artwork. His work includes the famous Starry Night, Wheatfields, Cafe Terrace, Sunflowers, Almond Tree and many more paintings. I took my time to instil their beauty within me. Later, I researched him some more. I read about him and saw a wonderful movie named Loving Vincent, which helped me understand his art better. I still adore his art every day.
What makes him my inspiration?
He was a shy human being whose childhood affected him the most. Somehow my story is the same, I was a shy child, and some things happened to me during my childhood, which made me rebellious and furious. But despite his sufferings, Vincent never harmed anyone. He had never thought of hurting anybody by his gestures or words. He loved without judging; he would ponder about whatever humbled him, that’s what I find common in him and me. I miss him, yes I miss him. I wish I could be his friend. I would have never let him feel alone. I would have painted with him and took good care of him.
He was also a good reader; he read a lot before picking up a brush. He picked up his first brush when he was 28. He was fond of books like some people are fond of different kinds of food. He would breathe and intake emotions; he was a lovely human being who would never harm anyone. He may fight with you for his opinion, but he would never hurt you. This gentleman was only understood by his brother Theo and his wife. His death makes me sad, but his paintings moved me greatly. It was like I found someone who felt like I did. He was a good human being and a great artist that everybody should know about.
Being an emotional person is not bad at all. His quality of work matches with the Indian Pioneer Satyajit Ray, who tried to showcase misery of the poor, the joy of regular life and taught us to feel lively in the present. His work, the Potato Eaters will move you to feel the misery. The Almond Tree would teach you to love the trees, flowers, and sky. Wheat Fields will make you understand how a present emotion is a wonderful thing that has happened to you. Starry Nights would teach you to adore nights around you; be it a busy or calm night.
His works consist of a lot of teachings because he felt a lot. One day, I will also draw without the fear of screwing up. I have started believing in myself. I hope you all find your inspiration and do what you really want to do. As John Keating once said- “Medicine, law, business, engineering, these are noble pursuits and necessary to sustain life. But poetry, beauty, romance, love, these are what we stay alive for.”
हेडलाइन पढ़कर अब तक तो आप समझ ही गए होंगे कि हम कुलदीप नैयर जी की बात कर रहे हैं? कल 95 वर्ष की उम्र में कुलदीप नैयर जी की मृत्यु हो गई, वो कई सालों से खराब सेहत से जूझ रहे थे और बुधवार देर रात अचानक उनकी सेहत ने जवाब दे दिया।
कुलदीप नैयर की मृत्यु भारतीय पत्रकारिता जगत के लिए बड़ा धक्का है। वो भारतीय पत्रकारिता के पितामह थे, उनकी कमी शायद ही कोई पूरी कर पाए।
आज के दौर में जब पत्रकार, नेताओं के हाथों बिक रहे हैं, वे अपनी कलम को भी गिरवी रख रहे हैं, उस दौर में कुलदीप नैयर की कमी बहुत खलेगी। मंत्रियों के करीबी और विश्वासपात्र बनकर भी कैसे मंत्रियों की गलत नीतियों की आलोचना की जाए ये कुलदीप नैयर से सिखा जा सकता है।
कुलदीप नैयर तत्कालीन गृह मंत्री गोविंद वल्लभ भाई पंत और लाल बहादुर शास्त्री के सूचना सलाहकार भी रह चुके थे। जब तक कुलदीप उनके सूचना सलाहकार थे तब तक तो वो मीडिया में उनकी छवि बनाने में लगे रहे। कई बार तो लोग उन्हें उनके नाम से नहीं बल्कि यह कहते हुए उनके बारे में बोलते थे, “अरे ये तो वही है ना जो बल्लभ भाई पंत का गुणगान मीडिया में करवाता है?”
वो शास्त्री के सबसे करीब थे। उन्होंने खुद अपनी किताब “एक ज़िंदगी काफी नहीं” में लिखा है कि उनका शास्त्री से आत्मीय लगाव था। शास्त्री के प्रधानमंत्री बनने के बाद भी कुलदीप शाम में उनके साथ बैठकर देश की आर्थिक और राजनीतिक पहलूओं पर उनके साथ बातें किया करते थे।
राजनीतिक लोगों से इतने करीब होने के बावजूद भी वो उनकी आलोचना करने से हिचकिचाते नहीं थे। ताशकंद बातचीत के लिए शास्त्री जी कुलदीप नैयर को भी अपने साथ वहां लेकर गए थे। कुलदीप वहां की पल-पल की जानकारी अपनी प्रेस एजेंसी यूएनआई के पास पहुंचा रहे थे।
इसी बीच उन्होंने शास्त्री जी की आलोचना करते हुए कुछ लेख भी यूएनआई में छपवा दिए, इस पर शास्त्री जी कुलदीप नैयर पर उखड़ गए। उन्होंने कुलदीप पर आरोप भी लगाया कि वो उनके करीब होने के बावजूद भी सरकार के अनुकूल लेख नहीं लिख रहे हैं?
कुलदीप नैयर ने खुद अपनी किताब में लिखा है कि वो पत्रकारिता में गलती से चले आए हैं। वो वकालत के पेशे में जाना चाहते थे। जिसके लिए उन्होंने लाहौर यूनिवर्सिटी से लॉ में डिग्री भी हासिल की, लेकिन इससे पहले कि वो अपने गृहनगर सियालकोट में खुद को वकील के रूप में अधिकृत करवाते, उससे पहले ही भारत-पाकिस्तान का बंटवारा हो गया।
बंटवारे के बाद वो दिल्ली चले आएं और फिर उर्दू पत्रकारिता “अंजाम” में रोज़ी-रोटी चलाने के लिए उन्होंने नौकरी शुरू कर दी।
बाद में महान शायर हसरत मोहानी की सलाह पर कि उर्दू का भारत में कोई भविष्य नहीं है वे अंग्रेज़ी पत्रकारिता की ओर मुड़ गए और अंग्रेजी पत्रकारिता पढ़ने अमेरिका चले गए। वहां उन्होंने पत्रकारिता से एमएससी किया। पत्रकारिता की डिग्री लेकर लौटने पर उन्हें पीआईबी में नौकरी मिल गई।
आगे यूएनआई, स्टेट्समैन, इंडियन एक्सप्रेस आदि में भी उन्होंने काम किया और अपने काम से प्रसिद्ध होते चले गएं। एक्सप्रेस में उनका स्तम्भ ‘बिटवीन द लाइंस’ सबसे ज़्यादा पढ़ा जाने वाला स्तम्भ था।
उन्होंने एक बार कहा था कि मैं पत्रकारिता के पेशे में शुरुआत (आगाज़) की बजाए अंत (अंजाम) से दाखिल हुआ इसलिए वो हमेशा कहते थे कि मेरे सहाफत (पत्रकारिता) का आगाज़ अंजाम (अंत) से हुआ है।
The more people react (even negatively) to your post on a platform like Facebook or Twitter, the more they will show your post to your audience. A regular Facebook post that is not liked, commented on or reacted to by anyone will be shown to a much lower percentage of your network, and that too only those people who are more likely to react. With an extreme or shocking post, the opposite is true.
Is this kind of media doing justice to democracy? My short answer would be “No”. The long answer includes the fact that misinformation abounds on social media. Few bother to check the sources of information, and even if someone disproves something, they are then put under suspicion of being biased. However, can things change? Newspapers, radio, and TV have also published false information. The only difference being that they can be sued for doing so.
On the plus side, social media allows a cause to go viral and force change to happen.
Media has four basic responsibilities as the fourth pillar of democracy: It should tell the truth. It should be unbiased. It should not act to spread propaganda. It should strive towards the moral conditioning of the masses. And the current situation? It fails in every aspect.
Nowadays, many forms of media tell half the truth, and even outright lies. The authenticity of the news is no more guaranteed. The JNU row was an example of how media houses sold lies or half truths. Almost every media group has ideological or political biases. In many cases they are owned by the heads of political parties. If you observe a news programme for even a few minutes you will get to know the political inclination of the channel. These media outlets serve us their prejudice and spread propaganda. We begin to see media trials, because these channels have begun to see themselves as superior to judiciary. In the name of moral policing, every now and then opinion building is served. The average viewer is bombarded with opinion polls and heavily biased talk shows.
Firstly, social algorithms allow fake news stories from untrustworthy sources to spread like wildfire. Many of us just assume that there is a modicum of truth in advertising. We expect this from commercials, but not from politicians and political parties. Occasionally, a political actor gets punished for betraying the public’s trust through their misinformation campaigns. But in the United States “political speech” is completely free from reasonable public oversight, and in most other countries the media organisations and public offices watching politicians are legally constrained, poorly financed, or themselves untrustworthy. Research demonstrates that during the campaigns for Brexit and the US presidency, large volumes of fake news stories, false factoids, and absurd claims were passed over social media networks, often by Twitter’s highly automated accounts and Facebook’s algorithms.
Second, social media algorithms provide a very real structure to what political scientists often call “elective affinity” or “selective exposure”. When offered the choice of who to spend time with or which organisations to trust, we prefer to strengthen our ties to the people and organisations we already know and like. When offered a choice of news stories, we prefer to read about the issues we already care about, from the pundits and news outlets we’ve enjoyed in the past. Random exposure to content is gone from our diets of news and information. The problem is not that we have constructed our own community silos, humans will always do that. The problem is that media networks take away the random exposure to new, high-quality information. This is not a technological problem. We are social beings and so we will naturally look for ways to socialise, and we will use technology to socialise with each other. But technology could be part of the solution. A not-so-radical redesign might occasionally expose us to new sources of information, or warn us when our own social networks are getting too bounded.
The third problem is that technology companies, including Facebook and Twitter, have been given a “moral pass” on the obligations we hold journalists and civil society groups to. Driven by sensationalism and TRP, media house have taken a corporate turn. It’s courtsey of the media house that Kanhaiya kumar and Hardik Patel became overnight celebrities. TRP-generating news is deliberately shown in loops, while more worthy news gets neglected. That’s selective coverage. For example, Assam’s floods did not got the required coverage as at that time Pratyusha’s suicide was telecast for TRP.
Is it not a cruel irony and an affront to the people in general that so much time and resources are spent on such things, and consciously the terrible economic problems, social issues and censored controversies remain unaddressed? Media houses have stooped so low that they are willing to compromise national security and secrecy. In the name of censorship, the government is trying to restrict the flow of information. And the media is bound to resist that. Episodes like blackening the screen or banning a channel have popped up. The Nirbhaya case of 2012 is an example where media’s constructive role was able to generate people’s involvement in the radical reform the country required. But why weren’t innumerable other cases addressed in the same way?
The current media/press is completely a business entity. Their interests towards public welfare is dubious. They can manipulate the facts as they want. They assume nobody will question them, not even the judiciary. They can motivate, influence, and impact all of the pillars of democracy.
Here’s another thing: Bad news sells. They’re called the fourth pillar of democracy because they empower people with information. Especially the information that will make us vote. Of course, when there is press censorship, the news will never be truthful. It will always be one sided. But do we realize its 2018? You cannot curb information, it will find its way out. People in power who are corrupt will be called out. Corruption will become more difficult to accomplish, and will have to be done more covertly. When exposed, corrupt and powerful people will be more likely to face consequences. If the media function without earning bread through ill practices, that’s true press freedom. However, it’s only when those who own the media sources allow it. You can legally have press freedom, but if media is consolidated to the point where very few people control most of the sources, that freedom becomes an illusion. The pros are obvious, to provide a healthy counter balance to the wrath of unchecked power. But those pros assume the press is not in and of itself enthralled in the wrath of its own powers. Freedom of any kind cannot exist without its paradox. A paradox too-loosely applied to the press, and in desperate need of readjustment.
To wit, CNN, as a leading news-centric channel, has literally become smut television, of endless talking-heads without verifiable or meaningful merit endlessly regurgitating their opinions as if it were news. Laced in, supported by, and no doubt ruled by companies promoting endless advertising of toe-nail fungus medicine, and the like. Other news channels follow the same revenue optimisation techniques to compete, instead of reporting news as it happens, when it happens. Indeed, news production has lost its collective mind and merit by trying to be the counter-balance to our law-makers.
Reporters are deemed to have merit, and put on a pedestal, only when their likes or shares on social media reach a certain threshold. This rat-race for populism is based on an agenda quite different from the integrity of the news that matters. Last but not least, as I realized in my own experience with the national (and international) press, with the advent of the internet as its accelerant, the focal point of the press has turned into fast short-form hits, with the shallow description and coverage of consequential events disconnected from a plausible relationship to cause. The press has on the whole become a rebel without a cause.
So yes, I do think the press needs to be held accountable in order to portray, suitably, our elected officials. And we must ensure the press is not as flawed as the US presidency. We have plenty of instruments in our democratic process to hold our media to account. And if not, we better reinvent our constitution which defines and stipulates those controls. The press must be able to speak its mind, like all of us. And let the merit of their wisdom define whether they should be taken serious or not. They have sunken very low, and I am glad they are being challenged. As we all should be.
I have lost my confidence in the press, and I speak with many leaders in their respective line of work who feel exactly like I do.
Let me paraphrase former FBI director James Comey; just because you are talking about something (frequently) doesn’t mean you know what you are talking about. Let us not forget how the press turned Michael Jackson into a villain, we now know he clearly was not.
“At the stroke of the midnight hour, when the world sleeps, India will awake to life and freedom” – Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru
These were the words of our then Prime Minister Nehru, 71 years ago. Seventy one years later I, a citizen of India questions this statement. Has India really awoken to freedom? Technically yes, we are a democracy, we have fought for our independence and attained it after a lot of bloodshed. We are free from the clutches of the colonial emperors. Theoretically, we are independent. In the books of political sciences, the Republic Of India is a free state. But the statistics of the murders of the journalists who voiced their opinions and practised their right to freedom of speech, speak a different story.
On May 3, 2018, the world celebrated World Press Day, and on this occasion, Reporters Without Borders (RWB) released the freedom ranking, and the worlds largest democracy was placed at 138th rank out of 180 countries, just above Pakistan. Some of our very own countrymen came forward and commented, “well we are at least in front of Pakistan.” Yes, we are but only by one rank. But seriously, are our standards so low that we are comparing our basic rights of democracy with a country which, at least according to me, knows very well how to hide a dictatorial regime behind the curtains of democracy.
There is no question about the fact that the freedom of the press is under a great threat. People argue that the fact that the press is operating and reporting the data and people like me get to know about what is happening in the country and around the world is proof that freedom of the press exists. But to them I would ask, have you seen the after-effects of exercising the right to freedom of the press? Have you read about the deaths of Shujaat Bukhari, Gauri Lankesh, Santanu Bhowmik and many others whose names may or may not have appeared on the headlines?
India is a diverse country, with a population of around 135 crores; it is obvious that there will be a difference of opinion. Hence, when we voice our opinions, there will be someone who will have a different point of view. I understand that your words will have consequences, but I don’t, rather I can’t, understand that these consequences will be in the form of threats or worse, in deaths.
Noted lawyer Fali Nariman told a gathering at the Press Club of India in New Delhi last June: “Freedom after the speech – that is really what freedom of speech is all about.” He emphasized that “you are allowed to speak, speak as much as you like, but there is a fellow waiting there to nab you and out you, in so you can’t speak again!” Hate for differing views is dangerous for the democracy.
I do not solely blame the current government for the decline in journalism and the state of freedom within the media. The origin of this situation goes deeper to several years earlier. No one can forget that the obstruction of a free press was one of the important highlights during the darkest period of our democracy – the emergency.
Freedom of the press is violated not only by the murders but also by the fact that there has been so much censorship that it takes away the right of audience to decide what to watch, what to read, etc. Censorship is needed in certain areas which are moral, ethically wrong (for example child porn), hence legal interference is required. But stopping an adult to exercise his/her choice is constitutionally wrong.
Another indirect way in which freedom of the press is violated is by turning the fourth pillar of democracy into an industry of competitive market forces. Well, there is nothing wrong with having a free and fair competition but it should not violate the basic purpose of free media, which is to serve as a link between the government and the people.
Fear is a critical component which obstructs freedom, and if the journalists have fear in them, the government, the industrialists, the “powerful people” will be unstoppable.
138 in 2018 or 132 in 2012 is not the matter of fact, but whether the press will get due freedom, whether the civil society will stand up and make it an important issue is the point.
Hence, as our country enters its 72nd year, let’s strive to work hard in respecting, cherishing and protecting our fourth pillar of democracy because freedom of the press is not just important to democracy it is democracy.
