Censor censored

Why, for instance, must our censors be nominees of the government of the day? Surely freedom of expression is too precious to be left to the whim and prejudice of mostly disinterested political party workers who cannot be accommodated in more lucrative posts. And bored bureaucrats’ wives who watch the occasional flick to keep themselves busy.

Perhaps the process of selection could be reframed to pick out those who know and love cinema. As far as censorship norms are concerned, changing social and political mores and a vaulting technology have already left most of the existing guidelines way behind. Those norms need to be overhauled to accommodate changes in both the filmmaker and the audience. They also need to acknowledge that a fast-moving technology has in any case cut most of them down to size.

In this context, it is particularly significant, and welcome, news that the Board is considering dismantling the existing system of suggesting cuts and replacing it by one in which films will not be banned or heavily censored, but rated and issued certificates. It is flirting with the idea of allowing theatres to screen X-rated movies, for instance, as is being done in many countries — without cuts, in special halls, with higher levies.

Of course, there will be problems. Many will carp about Indian audiences not being mature, or educated enough, to ‘handle’ these freedoms. Others will point to a precariously poised political climate and prescribe even stricter monitoring than the one that already exists. But, in the end, the plain truth is that the Censor Board has no option. It must reinvent itself because we have, thankfully, travelled a very long way from government-controlled fare and captive audiences.