Every time I reel from the after-effects of a Dubya mishap and wonder what prompted me to make the trip halfway round the globe to this country, India answers with an episode – usually one that makes me shake my head and sigh in resignation and say, "oh, that's why". That's not necessarily a good thing, but it goes a long way in explaining why I'm not a stone's throw away from a home-cooked meal of lentils and rice (which can be surprisingly delicious when done right).
The exceptionally gifted policy-makers in my home country can always be counted upon to do something jaw-droppingly stupid, like impose curfews in night-clubs or decide which cable service you can or cannot buy. I might not necessarily care one way or other, but I'd like it to be my choice, is all. My other beef with them is their sheer inability to get priorities straight – I’d rather they insist you pick up your trash, for instance, than regulate physical affec(ta)tion in public places (both are known to cause irrepressible nausea, but at least in one case, it’s not cos of the pinworms in your intestines).
The latest furor is over the release of – surprise, surprise - The Da Vinci Code. Apparently, the information and broadcasting minister decided to first watch it to figure out if the rest of India should be allowed to do so. To a reasonable human being like myself, this begs the question: are we talking about a country or a third grade class? They might as well set parental filters on the control panel that India’s government is fast becoming.
The head of the Catholic Secular Forum has begun a “hunger strike until death” so the film can be banned. It’s not really my place but this forum doesn’t sound ‘secular’ to me. And if this could get any more ridiculous, Christians account for less than two percent of the country’s population. I know what you’re thinking – if two percent can threaten to ban a film what could eighty percent do? Simple -- they could shut it down altogether - a fate that Deepa Mehta’s thought-provoking and extremely relevant Water met with a few years ago, prompting her to flee to another country, shoot it under a pseudonym and simulate the irreproducible Ganges, before finally being released last month.
So, even while the technology hub in Bangalore manufactures the fastest processor to open us to the world of information, the morally conscious thought police decides to shield us from it. And boy, do I feel safe and secure under its (s)mothering. Now, if only it would drop some change in my pocket as well, so I can quit thinking altogether…
Not that Americans are that much saner. If the likes of Jerry Falwell and Pat Robertson could have their way, I’d probably be denied the liberty to watch Hanks make a mess of Robert Langdon myself. But the difference in this country is that, there is bound to be a sardonic Trey Parker to shut up a screaming Falwell. And for every incredibly close-minded, religiously blinded, kool-aid drinking cult, you can count on a pragmatic and relevant ACLU.
Last I checked, India was a democracy. I wish we’d treat it like one and allow the Mehtas to reveal horrifying truths about practiced Hinduism even while the Narendra Modis are practicing them....Cos that's what a democracy is about...It isn’t always popular or homogenous, it isn’t intended to be. But it’s functional -- as functional as a billion people with a billion different viewpoints can get…..
Egotism ....a lifelong romance
Wednesday, May 17, 2006
Oh, for the love of God! - the Sequel
Posted by Karthika at Wednesday, May 17, 2006
Labels: Pet Peeves
18 comments:
Are you also hoping that the 'hunger strike until death' stays true to word? I sure do. And if it comes true, the delaying of the movie release would be worth it, IMO.
lol, absolutely! stewart had it bang on target last night when he drew a satirical parallel to the gandhian hunger strikes. its really gotta be a matter of life and death if you wanna starve to death. if not, it's jus a juvenile tantrum...
Not bad afterall....looks like all the fuss was about getting to watch the first show of the movie. Now, everyone is happy, and movie is set for Fri release
yep, that's democracy in action for you :) chaotic, but functional for the most part...
it always amazes me that while people can read anything they like w/o inhibition, there's always a furor over showing the same on the silver screen. it is the extended reach i guess, but what difference does it make where you get your information from...
Won't you appreciate the rights of free speech for those that are against a movie that denigrates their interests?
Isn't that also what a democracy is about?
that's the evergreen debate of the fist stopping short of the neighbor's nose.
I'm all for freedom of "speech", so the religious fanatics can stand and protest outside the movie theater all they want, as long as those that wanna watch it can go in & do so. but when their blind faith deprives another section of the population of entertainment, which is their right, that's when freedom of expression goes over the top.
We do have a history of banning books, dont we? Fortunately (actually, UNFORTUNATELY) books don't have the reach of movies in our country (any country, to think of it). Thus, less commotion.
Since we are talking about movies/books...what abt Da Vinci??? While I did not expect the critics to rate the movie well, I was taken by surprise by the user rating.
If it's all because of the 'book always better than movie' truth, then Dan Brown needn't worry about the box office.
i wasnt surprised by the reviews. i heard a couple people at the Cannes festival discuss it and they seemed to think it was hard to follow. that makes sense -- the book has too much going on and you need to know it all to follow it entirely. 400 pages of art, history, symbolism & drama would be hard to convey in 2 hours of celluloid :)
with most books, the film makers compromise by not translating it in its entirety, but with this one, that would be hard to do...the least they could have done was choose the right stars. apparently tom hanks is disengaged in the entire movie and there's no onscreen chemistry b/w him and tautou...
no matter what, ron howard has nothin to worry about...the hype and hoopla will send the box office spiralling. there's no such thing as negative publicity :)
Cool column! I happened to watch Fire primarily because I like Shabana Azmi so much and it turned out to be a delightfully well written and acted story. I am not so sure about "Water" though probably because I dont feel it as socially relevant at this point. Most people (in my crcle of intellegentsia - the top 2% if you know what I mean) abhor the idea that after widowhood a woman is somehow untouchable while a man can freely go on to remarry. So, well, whats new, and it certainly aint a topic for cocktail conversation;-). Well, I might still watch, but whats the fuss?
India is a democracy and it does work. People cough a hairball when something new comes along and then go back and relax. Thats the cool part, except one day I had this conversation with the nephew of a military guy in the Indian army and it was like talking to someone out of "Saving Private Ryan". So yeah, it does work in the main so long as we keep the real anarchists quiet:), and IMHO, certainly better than what this country is leading towards:). I mean, India had it good as long as the world didnt care a rats arse about what happened there. Watch out what you wish for, mother India!:)
Anon: If the movie denigrates these people's interests, they are free to NOT go watch the movie. Isn't it as simple as that?
The Bible talks about the Antichrist and there are several movies which portray Him as being the devil. Now what if the Devil -worshippers got together and said..right..the bible and these movies violate OUR beliefs. So lets not have ANY of it. What are they going to do then?
About 50 million copies of The DaVinci Code have been sold worldwide. The movie makers figure - if they can sell one ticket to every person who read the book (and I'm pretty sure every person who did read it will want to go watch it) they would have more than achieved their objective.
As for the critics - that's what they are. Critics. Their job is to poke holes and find fault with just about everything which they do a good job of. There hasn't been one book that's been satisfactorily translated to celluloid , well except for The Godfather I&II.
However I must admit that Dan Brown's writing isn't anything to er..write home about. It left me with a slightly sour aftertaste, but as long as I was reading the book I moved at an express pace - which is what I wanted.Its like a James Bond movie I guess - you just sit on it and enjoy the ride...
Puck,
So much for democracy – they haven’t released the movie yet. I like to think of democracy as the one form of government that leaves some room for anarchy (read: self-government) and hence my libertarian sympathies for it :) but apparently that's not how it works!
It’s true that we don’t discuss the problems of hindu widowhood in our circles, but the issue is very prevalent in rural India; in fact that was Mehta’s inspiration for the film in the mid nineties. One thing that will never cease to amaze me is the Indian social structure – those of us fortunate enough to not know about it will never find out. It even exists to a certain extent in higher circles. A recently widowed aunt of mine was expected to stay away from my cousin’s wedding celebrations a few months ago and my family is more liberal than most. Does it help someone that has recently lost her husband to be shunned from a family gathering? I fail to understand this line of thought – isn’t that plain callous or am I just wired wrong?
FS, absolutely -- the Satanists will get no slack cos they don’t sit in that ivory tower called religion. It’s sad isn’t it, that the movies with lewd social scenes breeze through the censor board, but ones that even begin to touch on religion, are stalled cos they don’t have a disclaimer proclaiming, “purely fiction”... I wonder how they would feel about a similar disclaimer in the movies you talked about – “don’t implement in real life – works only on the silver screen” ;)
Dan Brown is not an exceptional writer by any stretch of the imagination, but IMO, the thing exceptional about this book is that it combines an amazingly well thought-out plotline with a decent writing style and well fleshed out characters. And to top it all, it is so rich with knowledge of art and history. His lack of prowess is especially clear in A&D, where he screws up a truly creative thought process with bad writing.
Really. I thought Angels & Demons has been his best book to date .Very racy..edgy...and the ending was outstanding IMO. Maybe because I read it AFTER The Da Vinci Code...
How I wish Crichton had gotten into this style of combining religion with science :-).
However lets leave him to what he does best...combine Science with an ironclad Plot...
It might be worth reading Name of the Rose (Name Der Rose) by Umberto Eco, also made into a movie in 1986. Sean connery and Christian Slater play William of Baskerville and Adso of Melk respectively. It is the story of a murder mystery set in a 14th century Italian abbey in the midst of medieval Europe debating theological issues concerning the foundations, philosophies impacting and the power plays between the different regional churches. What I found interesting was the issues of science-religion that are very similar to the contemporary debates. Though I am aware of the antiquity of these debates, the opinions of William of Baskerville, a self-retired inquistor and the sleuth hired by the abbot to slove the murders are very interesting in the process of finding a balance between religious/spiritual faith and science. Also highly interesting is the systematic, rational methodology with semiotics that William employs.
Those of you who have read A&D and Da Vinci Code by DBrown will find some opinions familiar, even more thought provoking and infact better written. Though the laborious expansion of the history of different churches and the politics of the time threaten to loose the reader, if you do manage to stay a bit beyond half way, you will find a masterful writer and the wonderful translation from the original in latin highly informative and very surprisingly entertaining. Beautiful writing! However, if you cheat and watch the movie first- which is quite well done in fact- you will deprive yourself of good literature and the wonderful nuances of the hows and whys of the title.
Also, Eco's Foucault's Pendulum is equally delightful..I have not made inroads into it yet but have been captivated sofar.
I watched Water day before yesterday and can't but agree with Katrix that it is still prevalent and relavent in a lot of the rural areas and even among the 'higher society' in India. Wasn't Indira Gandhi (aka Gandy)and now Sonia revered among the scycophants for being glorious widows? They have happily ridden the worshipping waters for more personal glory, wealth, continued international-power play and safe guarding the Nehru-Gandy wealth. Though the method and intensity of discrimination might vary among the different communities, and from what is portrayed in the movie, it is nonetheless a very cruel practice.
However, one thing I'd like to point out is that this practice is not confined to just the brahmins; it has over a period of time seeped into the other non-brahmin and non-hindu communities as well. Maybe not in the majority. In some, it exists as a matter of pride (however surprising THAT may seem)to have some semblance of "culture and reaffermation of traditional values."
I loved the part where Chuiyya asks where the asharam for man-widows are because I remember asking the very same thing when I was a 6yr old. The reactions in both the cases were very similar. I have seen widows being 'made', living a life without color except for the one designated to them-a maroonish red in the brahmin community in south karnataka and black ash greased from the pooja lamp oil in place of the red kumkum- getting increasingly depressed and cranky and even violent towards all, designated to the sidelines during festivities and weddings,etc. Of course some of them voluntarily assumed all that with years of social conditioning. How many Indians and Indian families we know have actively encouraged them to not be considered 'widows' even if they are not subject to any of the above treatments? In our parents' generations? I thought Mehta has done a great film. it was a step back in family and my non-brahmin/ non-hindu friends' communities' history; I remembered all the different stories of widows I had heard and seen. And my immediate family is one of the most modern and liberal I have experienced. There are also stories of debates against this practice in my family with embracing of the Arya Samaj and the ideals of Raja Ram Mohan Roy. I remember listening wide-eyed to these from my grandparents. In fact my ajji (grandmom) was much loved for providing a happy and safe haven for some widows of her parents' generation. She used to educate them, cook their favorite food and never involve them in household/mid wifery chores as was the done thing back then.
If it is not the current preffered topic of cocktail parties, I guess Mehta has started it... Puck, I am not so sure that the top 2%, the intelligentia abhorr this practice..they do practice/ignore it as a social reality but as I said earlier with different intensities and empahsis. Or we wouldn't have a very smart Sonia being so successful post-Rajiv. Or my friend's grand aunt wouldn't be not wearing the kumkum today, though being rich and influential in her circles.
Smitts:
Dont we do most things in life simply because of tradition and because that is the way it has been done. Similarly, the practice of not wearing kumkum etc...Then whats the big deal about wearing the mangalyam, or the extra set of threads on the sacred thread? All of these are outward symbols of a station in life. Thats all. If a woman can reasonably argue for continuing to sport a kumkum or the mangalyam, why not? All I am saying is that the subject could have been dealt with in current terms. Secondly, it preaches to the converted. I cant imagine a whole lot of people watching the movie in India. OTOH, perhaps if mainstream movies would insert thought provoking scenes it might cause people to think about the traditions they have been blindly following. Lets not tar every Indian with the chauvinistic brush. Possibly (horrors of horrors), most average folks in India simply follow established patterns because they are too busy with other things...
I am just about sick of this "Amma" business in Indian politics. Jayalalitha, Indra Gandhi, Sonia Gandhi and who knows what next. Especially Indra Gandhi. Dont get me started...:)
Cocktail conversations was tongue in cheek.
FS, that is indeed my problem with A&D – amazing concept, incredible plotline, daringly provocative - but despite being so innovatively conceived in Brown’s head, it hasn’t quite made the transition to paper. You can still see flashes of brilliance but he seems unable to tie the strings together, for the most part – and may I say, especially the ending! I hated the way the carmalengo goes up in flames – it was so cheesy and melodramatic – totally out of tune with the rest of the book.
That said, I think he has managed the impossible task of convincing his readers that you can take your pills from modern medicine in the morning and still rely on the strength of that higher power at night. I actually hope A&D is made required reading in American high schools so the intellectually shielded kids in middle America realize that science can co-exist with god and you don’t necessarily have to shun evolution & abortion to be able to attend Sunday mass.
yeah, I wouldn’t change a thing about Crichton’s writing :) He does do a little bit of that in his biography though, where he brings out the divide b/w eastern philosophy and modern medicine and his reflections first as a doctor and then as a layman, in the brilliant way only he can….
Smitts, that book sounds pretty incredible -- what better setting than 14th century Europe for a debate on theology! Another book on the subject that I have only glanced at but would highly recommend is Francis Crick’s Astonishing hypothesis, where crick says our minds can actually be entirely interpreted scientifically as opposed to resorting to paranormal explanations. He breaks it down, literally, to atoms and molecules. And coming from a nobel prizing winning scientist doesn’t hurt :) While on the subject, an absolutely comprehensive piece in last year’s December Atlantic Monthly (‘Was God an accident?’ – makes for a thought-provoking title huh?!) makes a categorical claim that there is no basis to supernatural phenomena. But science apart, I guess most reasonable human beings agree that we believe cos we need to believe, rather than actually believe.
Very well-put -- I think all that you say, in essence, captures the heterogeneity of most issues in India, including widowhood, contemporary or otherwise. And regardless of what any of us feels about it, I think we’ll all agree that Mehta has brought the issue to the table, where it most certainly belongs. But Smitts, much as I appreciate the celebrated widows dating back to as far as Rani of Jhansi, I would, for once, like to see a woman emerge into prominence w/o being a man’s wife or daughter or widow :)
For what it’s worth, I do think the only reason such practices still exist is humankind’s irrational fear of change. Some of these traditions are so inextricably steeped in the system and wired into our minds that we don’t seem to be able to get rid of them. And the concept of God, when combined with religion seems to be especially refractory to any form of catharsis.
While it’s amazing to see India progress on the economic/technological front, I do wish we’d progress a little on the societal front as well. I also think one big reason for our lack of knowledge or the inclination to do anything about it, is the unchanging predisposition toward science over sociology, a concept that is certainly not helping the rich-poor divide, allowing the smallest microchip and the little dot called the kumkum (or lack thereof) equal credence.
Organizations like the Arya Samaj are my only reason for a continuing faith in a progressive-thinking Hindu Society – if we had thinkers in the 18th century that so easily gave up the bells and whistles (which, needless to say were added on to the unadorned religion to make it more attractive), we should be able to give up baseless ideals in the age of supercomputers, shouldn’t we? :)
Puck, the ‘following of established patterns because they are too busy with other things’ is exactly the reason why the so-called “issues” you see cropping up in political debates in the US are hardly discussed in India; when its people are busy trying to live, discussions of pro-life and after-life become a non-issue ;) But when it does begin to affect the life of the unfortunate few, I guess it’s time to wake up and do something about it :)
Post a Comment