Safeguarding culture, the uncultured way

MUMBAI, December 3: Yesterday's disruption of Deepa Mehta's film by members of the Shiv Sena Mahila Aghadi is akin to that children's gam...

MUMBAI, December 3: Yesterday’s disruption of Deepa Mehta’s film by members of the Shiv Sena Mahila Aghadi is akin to that children’s game of musical chairs where they chant, Fire on the mountain. Run, run, run. Everyone cries Fire but the focus is on the chair.

Overtly, the Sena’s concern is for women and Indian morality at large — Anand Dighe, for instance, justified banning the film in Thane, saying that if Fire is allowed to be screened, “any two women living together will be looked upon with suspicion” — but under that cry of Fire is a conspiracy of a political party, of a government, to use a cultural issue for blatant political mileage. And what better way to do it than prey on the sexual fears of the Indian mind; on a certain male psychosis that any sexual aberration will turn their women from Bhartiya naris into wilful wantons.

Why else would the chief minister, custodian of law and order, congratulate the activists for what is clearly an act of vandalism, justifying itby saying: “Culture is more important than glorification of art.”

Story continues below this ad

Why else would Pramod Navalkar join this tacit conspiracy and chose to look the other way when members of the Aghadi forewarned him about the planned disruption?

A delegation of Sainiks had met Pramod Navalkar on Tuesday to register their protest which he forwarded to the chairperson of the Censor Board and the Prime Minister. Why did he do that? The chairperson of the CBFC cannot do anything once a censor certificate is issued. As for the Prime Minister, surely he is bogged down with more pressing issues. Instead, why did Navalkar not suggest a recourse through the court of law?

Secondly, according to an Express Newsline reporter who was present at this meeting, when the delegation asked him about the possibility of the state providing protection to the cinema hall owners in case of open confrontation, Mr Navalkar smiled and said: “Ask Mr Munde. He looks after the law and order.” The next morning the activists stormedCinemax.

Did the delegate’s question on security alert Navalkar to the possibility that the Sainiks-given their penchant for Quick Gun Murugan combat tactics-might try something untoward. Or, does he too, like his chief minister believe in cultural sanctity above all, even law and order. (Though there is something ludicrous about the CM justifying the disruption and an additional commissioner of police, Rakesh Maria, arresting the disruptors).

Story continues below this ad

Sena is not the first to object to Fire. Homosexuality is a queasy subject for most Indians. But unlike sections of the audience who heckled or walked out during shows, unlike the Jain Samata Vahini, an organisation that has gone blue in the face, asking “women from cultured families to boycott the film,” the Sainiks chose to vandalise, they chose to disrupt at the gun-point of fear. They did so because their ministers knew and approved. They did so because they see no irony in safeguarding `culture’ in so uncouth a fashion.