Author: Javed Akhtar
Publication: AgencyFaqs.com
Date: December 20, 2006
URL: http://www.agencyfaqs.com/news/stories/2006/12/20/16668.html
"Art is all about entertainment, but
there's a fine difference between art and circus," began Javed Akhtar
at the fifth Subhas Ghosal Foundation lecture held in Mumbai. The well known
lyricist, writer, and social activist had been allotted the topic, 'The Role
of Secularism in Hindi Cinema'. Akhtar said that cinema, although exaggerated,
is relevant to the common man, and one can actually learn a lot about real
society from Hindi movies. "Dreams don't offer realism either; but they
are relevant nonetheless as they are often a reflection of our thoughts,"
Akhtar said. "In a way, cinema is like a relevant dream as well…on
decoding it one can unearth the collective psyche of the society."
Having established the relevance of Hindi
movies in society, Akhtar went on to outline the importance of characters
in films, and how these are a mirror image of real life. He said that if one
makes a list of Hindi film villains over the last few decades, he can actually
learn everything there is to know about society's evolution in India. In the
1940s, we had the Zamindars as villains, which was a reflection of the actual
state of affairs. In the 50s, this villain lot was replaced by the factory
owner bully. In the 60s, however, the underworld don of big cities ruled the
small screen as the bad guy. "In the 70s, this underworld don became
a hero," quipped Akhtar. In the 1980s, the villain in a Hindi film was
invariably a policeman or a politician - yet again a reflection of societal
affairs. "In the 90s, Pakistan became the villain," said a candid
Akhtar, to everyone's amusement. "In the new millennium, we don't have
any villains; such characters in today's movies frighteningly resemble us!"
On a more somber note, Akhtar spoke of a time
which shook the nation: the year 1947. "India went through a trauma back
then, but Hindi cinema couldn't handle that and pretended it didn't happen,"
Akhtar said. "For a very long time, Hindi cinema did not touch upon this
topic." Further, he insightfully declared that for several years after
partition, no film with a Muslim protagonist was made. Finally, in 1960, 'Chaudhvin
Ka Chand' came along which broke this trend, followed by 'Mere Mehboob', both
of which has Muslim characters as heroes. "These films, to my mind, were
dangerous, because they created 'Super Muslims' or unreal Muslims," Akhtar
stated. For instance, such films showed Muslims to be understandably pathans
or nawabs living in large 'havelis', who talked only in poetic lingo, wore
sherwanis all day long, indulged in Mujras/brothels, and sported beautiful
women at their arms. "This created a world that never existed!"
exclaimed Akhtar.
So then, one saw the era of two categories
of Muslims. "The first was who we saw on cinema. The second was my neighbour
- an owner of a cycle shop," smiled Akhtar. This real life Muslim then
started believing that his ancestors may have really led the kind of life
shown on screen. "As one can see, both these Muslims were far away from
reality," Akhtar said. But the story doesn't end here. The Muslim social
circle reciprocated this stereotype depiction. One then saw the birth of a
'token Hindu' or a 'good Hindu' in movies; a man who would sacrifice his life
for his Muslim friend. For instance, 'Mughal-E-Azam' had a Hindu character
that dies for the Muslim hero, Salim.
While the rapt audience was still digesting
that one, Akhtar hit another jackpot with his next point: that secularism
and religious tolerance in Hindi cinema is exclusively a Hindu's responsibility.
On secularism, Akhtar said that while we can have a 'Vijay' getting saved
by a '786 billa' (metal arm band that Amitabh Bachchan wears in 'Coolie'),
one is yet to hear of a Muslim character being saved by a Ganesh idol. "I
haven't seen a Muslim character play Holi in any film, although millions of
them do so in real life," Akhtar added. Further, while a goon can hide
gold behind a Hindu deity, one can't show a similar situation in a mosque,
as filmmakers are afraid of hurting the sentiments of a minority. This is
getting reflected in society too. "We find that few got arrested for
the Gujarat genocide," Akhtar said.
On religious tolerance too, Hindus seem to
shoulder the burden. "There are films on untouchables and child marriage,
but rarely one on a social malpractice by a minority," said Akhtar. The
closest a film came to doing that was 'Nikaah' (on the disadvantages of the
Muslim divorce system), but that too was a personal story, rather than a community
one. It all boiled down to one point: filmmakers know exactly what society
can take, and what it won't accept.
As the Hindu-Muslim debate was getting heated,
Akhtar decided to step away for a moment. "Hindi films haven't treated
Christians very well," he said. A Christian has always been depicted
as a good hearted drunkard, or the 'Mona Darling' type (the vamps in Hindi
cinema took on the form of Rita/Mona/Julie, who dressed and talked in a particular
way). "But then, heroines started wearing those kind of clothes, so the
differences with the vamps sort of vanished," joked Akhtar, evoking a
roar of laughter from those present at the event.
Akhtar concluded on a promise of a better
tomorrow. He placed faith in today's young generation, as they possess a less
tainted view of society, and are healthier than their parent generation, in
that sense. "This too, is reflecting in Indian cinema," observed
Akhtar. Secular movies such as 'Rang De Basanti', 'Sarfarosh' and 'Iqbal'
are finding their places in the hearts of Indians - three films which wouldn't
have been accepted in the 50s despite the roar of secularism that had erupted
then, Akhtar signed off.
