Mary Kom worth watching

Mary Kom another wonderful Bollywood film. Loved it! Its story line, its character portrayal, the settings...all commendable. Fine acting by  Priyanka as five times World Boxing Champion and Olympics winner M.C. Mary Kom, and Darshan Singh as Onler Kom, her husband. The film moves at great pace and before you know, it is the end. Over two hours of action and not a dull moment!

And what wonderful role models both Mary Kom and Onler make for our youngsters. Mary as a young woman who has taken up boxing, and her husband, as a supportive partner who offers to look after the babies while she trains to re-enter the boxing ring after pregnancy and childbirth, and gets ready to compete. I have not seen such inspiring figures, such powerful role models for our youngsters in a long long time. And ones that break the stereotypes for both men and women!

I am very dismayed to learn that the film has not yet been released in Manipur, Mary Kom's home state. There is a ban on Hindi films there by a militant group. And while the people of Manipur are travelling to neighbouring states to see the film, theatre owners in the state dare not screen the film and face the wrath of the militants. Also read that Onler is trying his best to get it released there. He has been in touch with the Chief Minister's office. Now imagine having to knock at the CM's door to have a film released about the national figure who has done her state and the country proud. What knots we tie ourselves in!

Then I hear, that there is some controversy over why the character of Mary Kom was not played by a Manipuri actress. It does not have to. In fact, it is good that it was played by a Punjabi from Meerut (if I am correct about Priyanka's origins). Cinema is an art form and no art form should be restricted or be restrictive. I thought Priyanka did justice to the role and so do Mary and Onler!

There is criticism and with reason about the north-east being left out from national mainstream. The rest of India knows so little about the north east. This is one film that is a giant step in changing that through the story of one of its best known face. I saw the hall full when I went to see it in Delhi. The audience largely youngsters, seemed to have loved it. Manipur should welcome the film. Screen it in schools and colleges as should the rest of India. It is not often that we get a film like this! Great job by its director, Omung Kumar and producer, Sanjay Leela Bhansali. 

Proud of you, Zubeen Garg!

Good to know we have an artiste who can stand up and fight for what he believes in. And that he will not be censored.

The United Liberation Front for Assam ( or ULFA),  true to its form, issued a ban on performing Hindi songs during a function in Guwahati to celebrate Bihu, the Assamese new year.  While other musicians gave in to the diktat, not Zubeen. He is reported to have said, "No power can dictate an artiste. We have our own freedom. I have earned nationwide fame singing Hindi songs. It is our national language. Who are they to say Hindi songs will destroy Assamese culture. It is an outdated ridiculous idea."

So proud of you Zubeen Garg! You sing so well in Hindi. I believe you can sing in many Indian languages and sound like the native. I would love to hear you sing in Assamese too. I wish we had more music festivals all over the country where singers from different parts of the country sing in different languages.

Great art in any form,  while it may have strong local roots, reaches for the world.  It can't and shouldn't be curbed.

Music knows no boundaries.  Glad you stood your ground against the rowdy censors!

More links to posts on Rowdy Censorship
Extremists frigthen us into silence  
A film maker who stood up to the rowdy censors

Zubeen provided security

Singing girls screamed at into silence

Three 16-year-olds who got together to sing in Kashmir  have been forced to stop singing. After their first public concert where they got the third prize.

A fatwa was issued against them by the 'Grand Mufti'.

We were told that it was because singing is 'Unislamic'. They were 'advised' to sing to themselves, at home.
Then we got to hear that 31 bands played at the concert, but no fatwa was issued against them.

The reason why this 3 member band attracted the wrath of the Grand Mufti was because they were girls.
So the argument that singing is unislamic falls flat.

Then we were told it is because they were a 'rock band', a Western influence in the pristine land of Kashmir. Please forget the fact that the land has for long been ravaged by the deadly terrorists from across the border who kill innocents in the name of holy war. But we have yet to hear religious leaders issue fatwas against these men who kill and maim. It seems some among these religious men believe that it is better to hold a gun than a guitar. But only if the hands that hold the guitar are those of a woman. For the many male bands who played at the concert, had the guitar. So, even the argument of the 'Western influence' falls flat. The influence cannot be 'good' for men, and 'lethal' for women!

Then on Arnab Goswami's show a self-style leader proclaimed, "They were dancing."

"They were showing body parts," said another of these worthies. 

Surely, they were standing and singing. They might have taken a few steps.  So did the male singers of other bands. If  faces and hands are exposed body parts, then yes, they could be held guilty. But so were the men.

In reality, the protest happened because they were girls and the society has double standards for women 'enjoying' themselves, taking part in anything that soothes the senses, brings about a sense of joy or exhiliration. The same self-style leaders will not protest if these girls were to pick up rifles, or even stones.

One veiled woman who spat words of hate on Arnab's TV show called for a boycott of the girls' families. It made me wonder was she envious of them - of their youth, their talent or the fact that their 'very Islamic families' were supporting them?

This veiled woman and the many men who have raised their voices against the all-girl band wished to silence the teenagers. And they did. That is the saddest part. The girls have decided to stop singing. That a few very vocal elements can tell us how to lead our lives, how to dress and how to behave is very scary.

And what a shame that instead of nuturing and encouraging talent, we silence it into oblivion.


But I also learnt that the youth of state took out a protest march. That gives some hope. That they are willing to speak up. But it seems no one has the guts to take on the Mufti.

extremists frighten us into silence

Another case of rowdy censorship. This one comes from Norway.

This was to be a blog on India. But one of my pet themes is human expression and how society seeks to control it. Expression gets curtailed, free speech is banned by a few among us who are loud enough to shout and violent enough to stomp, tear, destroy and even kill. All this as the majority of us just stand and watch, and remain silent.
Increasingly these shouters are getting more vocal, much louder and they frighten us into submission. With threats of violence, and vandalalim and plain murder.
And what is happening? The movie maker shifts base, the artist pulls down his work, the writer is banned. It is happening all over the world and with a frigthening regularity and frequency. Yes, we are becomong a lot less tolerant. We are unable to take criticism. We are unable to debate or frame fitting replies to something we do not like, or hold a contrary view to, in a civilised manner. When someone writes something, and we think it is wrong, why can't the argument be put forth in a civilised manner. Another article or a book, perhaps? Another set of paintings depcting the contrary view? Why do we have to throw stones, burn property and kill?
Last month, a Norwegian Library was forced to pull down posters of "anti-extremist Islamic Art" after vandalism and complaints by a small group of Muslims (three women we are told) who vandalised some works, and the library was forced to pull them down.
The posters were done by Ahmed Mashhouri, a Muslim artist and refugee from Iran. Ahmed and his wife were human rights activists in Iran and knew what people can do in the name of religion as they had experienced at first hand the cruelty of the Muslim fanatics.
The posters were up for only a few hours before the women got at them. This is what I call rowdy censorship and falls in the same category as the one that drove Deepa Mehta away from India for the filming of her film on widows, that drove Bangladeshi author Tasleema to exile first from her home country and for the second time from India, the country where she had sought refuge.
It is what frigthened a Mumbai gallery from exhibiting a painting which depicts nothing more than what our ancient scupltures do . Links to some of the stories are provided below.
The poster from the top is from Ahmed Mashhouri's collection.
In fact, I found the recent video of the public flogging of a girl in Swat valley of Pakistan, which was widely circulated, very very disturbing. The poster in fact, seems a watered down version in comparison of what some fanatics among us do to women in the name of religion.
I wonder if those who protested at the Norwegian library will raise their voice against the public flogging of a teenaged girl in Swat? Will those who bayed for the head of the Danish cartoonist, speak up against the flogging? And demand that those who did it be punished for their very unislamic act. Will the men who flogged her be brought to book?

For more on the posters -
Gateway Pundit: Artist Told to Remove Anti-Islam Display After Muslims Attack Exhibition
http://deathby1000papercuts.com/2009/03/norwegian-library-pulls-exhibit-of-anti-extremist-islamic-art-after-vandalism-and-complaints-by-muslims/

Articles on this blog -

Rowdy censorship and Deepa Mehta's film -Water

Have a cry

Rowdy censorship and Deepa Mehta's film -- Water

The issue of censorship, or how some elements in our midst have a say over what the rest of us do, is troubling. We need to examine our response to such elements who decide what we should do, how we should think, and how we should project ourselves. I wrote the article on Deepa Mehta's film some years ago. What happened to the film, the protests that it faced fall into the category that I term 'rowdy censorship', where a few loudmouths scream and shout, and even vandalise, forcing the artist to move away from the locale or hide his or her work. The photo you see here is a still from the film Water showing Chuhiya, the child widow with an older one.

The article first appeared on Voices-Unabridged - The E-Magazine on Women and Human Rights Worldwide.



"Water" the Forbidden Movie
by Shree Venkatram, 10/08/06
Deepa Mehta’s film, “Water”, has been drawing crowds ever since its world premiere four months ago. It ran full house in Australia and has become the highest-grossing Hindi language film in North America for 2006. But in the country of its origin, India, it has yet to be released.

Set in the 1930s, “Water” tells the story of upper caste Hindu widows in Varanasi. Seventy-five years later, young and old women still sit in the ‘widow houses’ of the holy city, packed off there by relatives who either found it too burdensome to look after them or wanted to grab their property. Poorly educated and often illiterate, these women live a life of penury with barely a sari to cover them and hardly enough food to see them through the day. Although separated by three fourths of a century, both sets of women are prone to sexual abuse and exploitation.

Though not on reel, “Water” tells another story about politics and perceived ‘national honour’. It is a contemporary story of how a small vocal group, playing the role of moral police, curtails free expression.

Deepa Mehta, the Indian-born Canadian filmmaker, had the necessary license from the Ministry of Information and Broadcasting to shoot the film on the Varanasi ghats in the state of Uttar Pradesh in 2000. Unfortunately, in a country that values democracy, stands by free speech and prides itself for its tolerance, the government issued license could not ensure the filming. The will of the cacophonous group prevailed. It burnt the main set of the film and threw it into the river. It shouted slogans demanding that the film troupe leave and burnt effigies of Deepa Mehta. Its statement to the press said, “They come with foreign money to make a film which shows India in poor light because that is what sells in the West. The West refuses to acknowledge our achievements in any sphere, but is only interested in our snake charmers and child brides. And people like Deepa Mehta pander to them."

Deepa dashed to Delhi, met with the minister, cleared the script again, and armed with an order that filming be allowed, returned to film. Under heavy police protection, the filming began. But after a couple of takes, the local authorities arrived on the sets, reporting that since they could not guarantee the troupe’s safety, they would have to leave.

It would be four years before Deepa would resume work on “Water” again, this time in the neighboring island country of Sri Lanka with sets made to resemble the ghats of Varanasi. The change of locale did not alter the story in any way, except for some details. In one sequence, for example, the people who go past the widows outside a temple look Sinhalese.

The protest about “Water” had a precursor. Deepa’s earlier film, "Fire", which dealt with lesbian love between two sisters-in-law, saw protests after three weeks of a successful run in cinema houses of Delhi and Mumbai. This was when a group decided that the film was “contrary to Hindu values, anti-Indian, corrupting of morals.” Cinema houses screening it were stoned and there were protest marches forcing the government to ban the film. Ironically, most of those who were protesting against “Water” had not read the script. Just as most of those who shouted slogans against “Fire” had not seen the film. Deepa Mehta said in an interview that she had come across people in Varanasi who had rewritten leaked pages of the script.

"Water" shows widows shorn of their femininity (tonsured and dressed in a shroud of white), being pushed to the fringes of society and made to beg for a living. Even the child widow, Chuhiya, has to follow the strict dress and behavior code. She is reprimanded for looking longingly at goodies in a sweetmeat shop, food a “woman” can’t enjoy after the death of her husband. Though society barely acknowledges their presence, it is not averse to exploiting and sexually abusing them.

The moral keepers of the 1930s had no qualms about the subjugation and sexual exploitation of the widows. The moral police of today gets offended because the film shows the country in a bad light, even though it has never raised its voice over the exploitation and the degradation of these widows.

Although the film has a tragic ending, the spirit in which it ends is uplifting. It is about winning when the odds are stacked against you. In a way, this is Deepa’s story—of how even with her sets burnt, her funds run out, her initial team of lead actors not able to give her new dates, she picked up the pieces to complete the task she had embarked upon. “Water” is a story of determination, of the indefatigable human spirit.

The link to the article on Voices Unabridged http://voices-unabridged.net/article.php?id_article=151&numero=10

More links to posts on Rowdy Censorship
Extremists frigthen us into silence

Have a cry

When artistic freedom gets curtailed, it is time to get worried. Of late instances of moral policing are on the rise in India.


Fearing police intervention over the display of supposedly ‘obscene’ artwork, Mumbai’s oldest public art gallery, the Jehangir Art Gallery, has told Delhi-based artist Damayanti Sharma, who had booked its gallery number 3 for a show, that she could not put up some of her paintings “for fear of offending the sensibilities of some quarters”.
The shocked artist plans to go ahead with her show – minus the censored pieces – from today. “I had already created the artworks for my show. I didn’t consider them offensive at all, but when I sent photographs of 15 of my works to the Jehangir Art Gallery, I learnt that about a dozen of them could not be put up. The gallery’s secretary Karthiyani G Menon sent me back a list of my works, most of which were marked as inappropriate,” said Damayanti. Menon confirmed that she had seen Damayanti’s photos and recommended that some works be removed from her show. “Of late, we’ve faced quite a lot of harassment from the Colaba Police Station. The cops come, confiscate the art, sometimes arrest the artist – it’s embarrassing for us. We are, after all, a public institution. We’re still reeling from the legal repercussions of hosting a photograph of Vikram Bawa’s work that focused on homosexual love,” explains Menon. Vikram Bawa’s case went up to the High Court, where a private party sued Jehangir Art Gallery for vulgarity. Senior inspector Deepak Vishwasrao of Colaba Police Station, however, defended the police stance on action against ‘offensive’ shows. “Nude art or anything that offends the religious beliefs of any section of the people is problematic. It is not my job to decide whether artistic licence can be granted simply because an art work is in a gallery. We just implement the existing laws, and respond to the people who take offence,” Vishwasrao said.

To see a painting by the artist click on the link below.

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/Potpourri/Breast-left-alone/articleshow/4217941.cms