Lighting up

Flips in the air,somersaults,and lands straight in his mouth. Filmstar Rajnikants onscreen cigarette routine is legal once again. The Delhi high court has held that the ban on depicting smoking in cinema violates the film-makers freedom of expression,and is unconstitutional. The judgment is welcome not only in its result less censorship but also in its method: Justice Sanjay Kishan Kauls judgment on Friday is a sophisticated commentary on the nuances and contours of the freedom of expression.

Apart from the tyranny of multifarious authorities who breathed down the neck of film-makers,Justice Kaul also elaborated on the purpose of films and cinema. A cinematographic film must reflect the realities of life, he said while pointing out that though unhealthy,smoking was not banned in real life. It made no sense to ban it in reel life. Besides,murder is illegal. Does that mean that a killing should never be depicted onscreen? The judgment replete with quotes from Mark Twain and Pablo Picasso as well as instances in popular culture,was a finely guided attempt to balance the effects of a health hazard with the creative needs of cinema.

Banning smoking scenes in films is also a slippery slope though the ill effects of smoking are uncontested,what if the state follows this up with banning other undesirables: dissenting voices,criticism? A state which mandates that art represent not what is but what ought to be,is a state not worth living in. The words ideal,good and correct are heavily loaded norms. In the hands of an authoritarian state,they become tools to enforce particular kinds of behaviour,and certain modes of thought. It is no coincidence that a country with as cherished a record in protecting the constitutionally guaranteed freedom of speech and expression has one of the most buoyant,diverse and colourful cinematic traditions. Though smoking must be discouraged,to ban it from public view was not only silly,but set a very dangerous precedent. Justice Kauls nuanced judgment is a welcome corrective.