TWENTY SECOND T.A. PAI MEMORIAL LECTURE

SECULARISM IN INDIAN CINEMA

Delivered by

SRI Film Producer, Sahyadri Films, 19/20a, Tardeo Road, Tardeo, Mumbai – 400 034

ON JANUARY 17, 2005

AT MANIPAL

T.A. PAI MANAGEMENT INSTITUTE MANIPAL

SECULARISM IN INDIAN CINEMA

I remember that for me it is a which is now got almost washed away. great privilege to come here and deliver The Island also almost washed away and the memorial lecture in memory of Mr. he remembered when he was the T.A. Pai. Because I remember that I met Development Commissioner and he was him many years ago, when I had made a allocating funds for Nicobar and series of promotional films for the Life Andaman at that time. He has gone Insurance Corporation. He was then there and there was a small tribal Chairman of LIC and my memory of him community that was living there and matches exactly what Mr. K K Pai said of their sole wealth used to be pigs and him about that lift that was made only they were piggy rich and when the for the Chairman in that building. I population of pigs grew, they became remember he was so down to earth rich and when they became rich like because the other Officers had said that that they always used to have a custom we know that you are meeting the which was to celebrate their wealth Chairman and the whole protocol was with their ancestors which meant that being set up for me so that I would go they would dig up the bones and skulls and not make any bloomers when I met of the ancestors and place them in front him. But interestingly what happened and did have all these live pictures of was the moment I met him, he started these pigs as they ‐‐offered to them. As to talk to me in ‘Konkani’. As you know, this was a community that had been everything was just simply vanished and converted to Christianity by the perfect and after that everything started missionaries when Andaman and to work very well. The films I made of Nicobar were taken over by the British course he liked them and so on and towards the end of the 19th century and then they became the series that went one of the interesting fact that they on for 17 (several) years after that. were all Christians and when Gill asked them “You people are Christians. Why Anyway, before I actually get you people are doing all these strange into my talk, I would be reading the kind of practice?” so the headman said other day very interesting thing when “Well, our religion is Christianity, but Mr. M.S. Gill who was our Chief Election this is our culture”. What he was and Commissioner sometime ago, he wrote what they were trying to say is a little article after that Tsunami. He was something that we as Indians talking about Andaman and Nicobar and understand perfectly well. Because you he remembered Campbell Bay which is know when Nehru talked about ‘unity in the southernmost point of Nicobar diversity’ he was really talking about this because we are extremely diverse situation like this you do not need to people in this country with so many add any kind of political idea of a different languages, so many different unifying concept, so that is why the customs where I come from micro‐ reason I am giving this long time of minority Saraswat community in appeal is because you see the world Chitrapur District. I am told that the secularism has unfortunately in recent Chitrapur Saraswat Census that was years become a matter of debate. taken a couple of years ago, they said Because of some of the political reasons they were no more than 22,000 people the terminologies like pseudo secular, and I thought we know we ever doing secular is also for, which I think is quite for survives and it suggests small meaningless because ultimately what community but actually it was survived we mean by secular is we mean and I know because nothing in India inclusive. In the context of India, it does which dies out and nothing at all dies not measure the mean that we should out in India. It goes somewhere out be functionally without our beliefs or crossing to the woodwork but when you our religions, it means that we will feel it merges again. So, that was the accept what other people for what they kind of things that happen so here we are. As long as that we accept that we have that level and extreme kind of are citizens of the same land, at that I diversity in languages, religions so many think is the essence of what it is and this different kind of things, yet there is is what concerned to be when it comes something that binds us together that to the cinema. brings us together and that is that quality which off course unfortunately Now, in the late 1950, Satyajit in India has least in recent years taken Ray, on being interviewed, he was one on a somewhat ugly path because it has of the greatest film makers of this got politicized. We politicized the country and producer, and he won the Il concept of this unified culture by giving Leone d’Oro (English: The Golden Lion), it a name and there was just no need for the highest prize given to a film at the that sort of thing because that really it Biennale Venice Film Festival. it is the does not bring people together and it first film ever to win such a prize, a very separates people. Because I think the prestigious film in the festival and essential needs of India have to be where in an interview when he was inclusive to include, we don’t reject asked he said that he was a Bengali film people, we include them. We may be as maker and the same year Raj Kapoor communities and thrones and froth won an award at Karlo Evaluative, extremely that self involved and self another international film festival at absorbed. But when it comes to relating Czechoslovakia and he got very upset he to other people we accept we are said why does Ray call himself as a tolerant, we accept other people very Bengali film maker? Is not he an Indian easily amongst us in our midst. So either film maker? Why should he make that funny kind of mistakes for himself? So the matter of course eventually got Tamil is largely shown only in Tamilnadu disclossed because Ray had qualified his and similarly Telugu films and Bengali statement what he meant what he did films etc. Hindi films tend to travel much not make films in Hindi that he was not wider and go beyond all these different a Hindi film maker and he was a Bengali areas. Anyway, couple of years ago, film maker in the sense that he makes actually now five years ago, Outlook film in Bengali which of course did not invited a number of social thinkers on satisfy anybody at all. Certainly not Raj the 50th Anniversary of the Indian Kapoor I know that. But the important republic, invited a number of social thing here off course is that people in thinkers as well as public personalities India because most of us automatically to answer the question what is an assume that film makers who make Indian? Vinod Mehta, the editor chose films in Hindi are somehow more to quote from a Hollywood film ‘the representative of India than who make party’, an American film, in which there films in other languages. This is a is a British comedy actor called continuing problem particularly for film Peterson, who played the character of makers of South India. Because the film an Indian and when he is asked in the makers in Kerala, we never say Indian film that ‘Sir, Who would you think you film much of the time we mean Hindi are?”. So he replied “In India we don’t film and film makers in Kerala get very think who we are, we know who we bugged and they will get very upset and are” they say what you mean the other people who make films in India and Now I believe this statement was same thing goes for Bengali film makers, actually meant as a joke but actually the Kannada film makers, Telugu film seriously speaking the express on what makers, Tamil film makers and all. most Indians know about themselves Anyway because the idea that largely and a quite secured in the knowledge Hindi being considered the National about we know who we are. You know Language of the country who make this security is an extraordinary thing Hindi films the concept of because this is what gives us in many representational for the whole country ways a great deal of strength. That we is natural and normal. There is no real have a civilizational identity as Indians insult to any of other film makers or never been questioned and the sort of other languages and therefore as far as I extent has been a probability to am concerned even today when I talk accommodate diverse and often of the about Indian films I will actually largely contradictory element in it. At any given mean film makers who make films in time we chose one or another of our Hindi. Because they travel beyond the many identities that we have depending areas, they travel all over the country on the needs of the situation. Simple while a film say made in Kannada is seen example, In Manipal it is very easy for largely in Karnataka, a film made in me to invoke my ‘konkani’ identity, you know the moment I go to Bombay, its very easy for me to have my lives are based on the hierarchies of ‘mumbaikar’ identity, when I go to caste, religion the tolerance of diversity Hyderabad I do the same because meant tolerating a whole sort of where I was born and grew up. So its inequity, in social behavior such as you easy for me to do that. So we have the are precious of your caste system, multiple identities which are wonderful. untouchability, for petrol subligation of I mean how many people in the world in women. Accommodation of a multitude countries have so many identities as we of beliefs and faiths did not as Indians do. It is an intra‐ordinary automatically mean that the individuals situation as we know if we are are free to choose from among these examined, each one of us, how many according to their personal inclinations. identities we have? Each one of us has On the contrary each individual is bound so many identities, not to forget that to more or less to the customs and the relational identities also, because traditions of the community that she or we are somebody’s son, child, he was born in. Now, this was the grandchild and whatever, nephew, problem I mean there was acceptance. grand‐nephew. Because, cousin of my But the acceptance was also of the father would be spoken about Mr. K K whole social hierarchies which had Pai and of course I am related to that, so many inequities within it. So, when we that’s my another identity too. I have talk again about secularism, been one of my uncle’s Narasimha inclusiveness etc. we always see that it Kamath who wrote ‘Indian Constitution’ has swung like a pendulum favouring also Dr. Bekal and that sort of thing. All the rights of communities sometimes these multiple identities, which is what and the rights of individuals at other makes us such an interesting times. While accommodating the community of people in the world. tolerance and qualities that often quoted as necessary for a quality to be Now, the structure of Indian secular and un‐equivalent hierarchical society, let us look at that is a complex traditional order does not easily lend mosaic of various other communities, itself to a secular state of society, not to religions, castes, sexes that constitute our democracy that entertain our country, and very well known fundamental human rights. Now this is sociologist Andre Beteille says, all these essentially the contradiction of Indian communities are in fact the building society. The basic contradiction is swing blocks of Indian society, in the past that constantly in tradition and fundamental diverse ways of life when either these human rights individual rights because challenge, no challenge but not all of that between these two you have them where held in equal esteem that tradition and you have modality change we know because we Indian automatically assumes that you moved communities have never gain egalitarian from this traditional framework to we will be hierarchical in our conscience individualism and rights of the and since the traditional order of Indian individual. So, in this movement we are of the parents who force her to marry constantly functioning like a pendulum who is somebody in India and she and this can be frequently very accepts and gets married to that person. confusing. It is politically confusing, Now, these kinds of things we are socially confusing, it is confusing within constantly trying and reconciling. This the family in terms of the attitude reconciliation, which is an aspect of between parents and children. And so Indian personality I am not always sure here is something which we constantly that it is the best thing for us. May be it have to work out. Because our ability to is, may be it is not; but one thing is accept we tend to accept tradition certain. Because it is the way we are wholesale and to accept tradition with one foot here and one foot there is wholesale automatiically assume the the manner which we are balanced proportion that you will never be able ourselves. We have kept ourselves to accept modernity. Yes, we want to growing without this country splitting be modern and you know in present day into many pieces. That of course is cinema, you will find that very absolutely clear. interesting that how does it happens. Take, for instance, you have films like, Anyway, to go back to the little whether I don’t know you have seen bit of history about the Indian cinema, this films like ‘Kuch Kuch Hota Hai’, ‘Kal when the tolerance in a community‐an Ho Na Ho’. important component of our national movement. We would never have Now, these are films that are become free if we were not tolerant supposed to show you modern Indians, and accommodative. And this that is Indians today who are forward‐ happened when Gandhi took over the looking not backward looking. Now, national movement. When Gandhi took what does this modernism actually over the independent movement of the represents in the cinema? It simply country, everybody was welcoming it. It represents that you have put a whole wasn’t meant for one or another group. heart of Indians not in India, but He did not stand and say that Hindus somewhere else like you would have are the original people of this country this film in which you have this house is and they have a greater right than populated by this particular family but anybody else; he did not say that. He that house is actually in Scotland, not in got everybody whoever lived in this India. And there you have a great story country as the part of the movement. about Indians and you have this people Now that was what gave us a kind of who are supposed to be extremely trust, and that was it is only because modern and you have this girl who that we became free, because all studies in some institution abroad but Indians were welcomed without regard when she comes back she instantly to creed, caste or gender and modeling submits herself to the most not itself on this feudalistic philosophy traditional but most retro‐gent attitude Indian nationalism came to represent everyone in the country. This majority. You had no more than 12% comprehensive nationalism was taken Muslims in the country and because to be synonymous with secularism thus these Muslims decided that India was to define oneself as an Indian was in their country and not Pakistan and they fact to be secular at that time. While the had decided that this is where they national movement was forged on the were born and this is where they were basis of anti‐colonist and anti‐ going to be die and they are the citizen imperialist guide the nationalist of this country. They had a position and leadership was equally concerned for right to be here. But in the minds the needs and reforms in traditional particularly in the establishment at that society. Although these related time in spite of fact that we had a series primarily to Hindu society that is why of Congress Government, we had the gaining independence from British rule Nehru era, model in front of us. Muslims was a primary concerned programs and were always seen certain amount of agitations were temporarily special interest. There was always untouchable, general equality were saying that why do those have a choice. also very much part of the movement. Why can’t be they just be like us? We To legitimate that claims to represent are here, this is our country, we remain the entire country has boosted here. Why should Muslims have this credentials, Indian nationalism and choice? that they have Pakistan, they sought the clearance of various groups have India. If they are of Pakistan, they including those that were marginalized should have gone there. But this was along the lines of caste, religion, impractical and this was complete language, region, gender and caste. Yet nonsense and never had happened. But there was excess of quality particularly the interesting part is that the people among the Muslim community that who lived here had to live constantly remained unconvinced about the cloaked with suspicion. This was a great Congress led movement in the country misfortune. Now, but in the Indian is truly representing their interest which cinema wherever the film was made, ultimately lead to the demand for particularly now the difference comes Pakistan. between north i.e. the Hindi film and south Indian films. When it comes to Now let me go into the problem films made in Kerala and Andhra never that once India became free and got got any problem, where the Muslims divided between Pakistan and India, the were not under any circumstances. You biggest problem for us was how do you could deal with them like you dealt with represent a Muslim in Indian cinema? anybody with a straightforwardness and Because before independence there honesty and which was very easy to do. were something like 28 to 29% Muslims The same thing went to Tamil cinema. in the country, Hindus were not such a But when it came to films made in Hindi, brute majority. But by creation of there was always this problem. So if you Pakistan, Hindus became a brute are dealing with the Muslim you always talking about them, these observed no dealt with kid‐loves. Kid loves always sense. patronizing and Muslims in films at that time say some post 1947, always had to Fortunately, by the time the be represented has been extremely second war with Pakistan took place in good people, they had to be honest like 1971, and then Bangladesh was formed nobody else is honest. They were the and then suddenly the concept of two best people you could meet. They were nation theory was collapsed. At that true to their word, extremely honest all moment, suddenly, you could look at these kind of things. This kind of Muslims in a normal fashion like you overcompensation to their look at each other. Without having to personalities, they could not be like worry because there is no question of normal people normally good, bad or now any extra territorial loyalty except different kinds not a Muslim. Muslim, in the minds of some political parties in he wouldn’t dreamt, he would be very the country. Unfortunately but were honest and he was an employee, he nobody else. For the general populous, would be the most honest employee. there is no such problem. And This kind of representation continued in particularly in Maharashtra we have a the Indian cinema until it became problem with one political formation is ridiculous but unfortunately went into there, who always consider that the other minorities as well like if you had Muslims to be extra‐territorially loyal Christians, you always found that which is an absurd thing when the fact Christians had to be always you know all that it is there. So you have in 1971, of them regarding, always went to mass. when the formation of Bangladesh you When you are showing a Hindu, you realized that there is no question of two always show him as going to the nations, because Bangladesh was not temples, but the Christians are always formed on the basis of the identity of going to mass, always wears his very Muslims, it was on the basis of the large cross, filmic representations. But culture that they have which was this became a problem because you Bengali. It was a Muslim state but know you could not deal with because it was culturally it was very minorities. Otherwise you will face that different from what West Pakistan was it would be a concept rejecting the at that time and for Pakistan was just minorities. The idea is you do not want one and then you have Bangladesh is to reject the minorities but by creating separate. And in Indian cinema for the the special image for them you have first time in post 1971, that absolutely a already rejected them. That’s why they realistic way of the Indians and Muslims are not part of you. That they are some were started and that was the film special people that you have to deal called “Garm Hava”. It was an absolutely with their personalities are very fragile, landmark film and for the first time you so you have to be very careful while could also deal in the Indian cinema with the realities of partition. With the truth of partition, the suffering that country. And this caused many took place on the both sides of the problems because when you look up at border where you can when you could Maharashtra, where the terrible riot look at it objectively with the great deal that took place in December – January of passion still be very honest about it. in that particular year and then in You did not need to be patricide and March we had the bomb blasts in only take one or another side. So that of Mumbai, and the process of healing has constantly making overcompensating taken a very long period of time and the for Muslims, for Christians and all these process of healing is not always easy kind of things disappeared. And I think unless there is justice. So it is a similar that was also the time when film makers problem for an instance when it comes like myself came into the film industry. to what happened in Gujarat or what We started to make films. As when the happened in 1984 in Delhi, the new cinema started in early 70, I would massacre of Sikhs in Delhi, massacre of say that Garm Hava—was the first kind Muslims in Gujarat a couple of years of film that was made by also from the ago. Now, unless there is justice healing person from Karnataka M.S. Satyu. So processes will not take place and if when that film was made and then after there has to be justice there has to be in that you will find that the situation people’s consciousness the need for this changed until we could look at each justice. I think this is where cinema has other with the sense of reality and with started to play an important role. Now the degree of honesty without having recently young people. There is a girl quite a patronized or be suspicious or called Sonali Bose who made a film any of these things. called “Amu”. ‘Amu’ is a film that takes you back to the massacre of the Sikhs in The most important point that I 1984. Because to this day 20 years have wish to make here is that as we come passed there is not one person who has closer to the present day, one of the been either sent to jail or convicted to things that started to happen once that then everybody knows and knew again in minority representations in our who those people were. Tragically and films was the effect of the political similarly the problem when it comes to transformations that were taking place Gujarat has been the same. And there is in the country. The rise of a party based another film like ‘Amu’, has been a film on a concept of ‘Hindutwa’ which was about that what happened in 1984, the BJP, when it came up, there was a there is a film called ‘Final Solution’ kind of sense of division between which is a detailed, shortlisted communities and that was exasperated documentary about the Gujarat killings with the Babri Masjid demolition. And that took place. Now this particular film with the Babri Masjid demolition, you took the Censors two years and they certainly had again a very serious were not given the censor certificate. problem of a minority feeling which And finally there was so much flirt or extremely answer to itself within the news in the media that the government has no right to censor it or expunge it. was forced to invite outside people and And so we found nothing that was people like me to come and look at that constitutionally invalid in it and film and to see if it goes worthy of being therefore it was given the censor given censor certificate largely because certificate, universal censor certificate whether it contravened any of the to see by everyone. Now, the areas like guidelines or the rules that are there to this that cinemas in India have played a that central film and the basic thing part will continue to play a part and about censorship is that as long as important part in keeping this country whatever you are doing is together. constitutionally valid, the government

Thank you very much…… About the Speaker: Shri Shyam Benegal

Shyam Benegal (born 14 December twin city of the state capital, Hyderabad. 1934, in Andhra Pradesh) is a prolific It was here, at age twelve that he made Indian director and screenwriter. With his first film, on a camera given to him his first four feature films Ankur (1973), by his photographer father Sridhar B. Nishant (1975) (1976) and Benegal. He received an M.A. in Bhumika (1977) he created a new genre, Economics, from Nizam College, which has now come to be called the Osmania University, Hyderabad. It was "middle cinema" in India. here that he formed the Hyderabad Film Society. He was awarded the Padma Shri in 1976 and the Padma Bhushan in 1991. On 8 Early career August 2007, he was awarded the highest award in Indian cinema for He started his career working in 1959, lifetime achievement, the Dadasaheb as an advertising copywriter, at a Phalke Award for the year 2005. He has Bombay‐based advertising agency, won the National Film Award for Best Lintas Advertising, where he steadily Feature Film in Hindi seven times.Shyam rose to become a creative head. Benegal, was born on 14 December, Meanwhile, he made his first 1934 in Trimulgherry, Secunderabad documentary in Gujarati, Gher Betha then a British Cantonment, and now a Ganga (Ganges at Doorsteps) in 1962. His first feature film though, had to wait Ghoda (1993); (1995); The another decade, while he worked on the Making of the Mahatma (1996); Sardari script. Begum (1997); Samar (1999); In 1963 he started a brief stint with (2001) and in 2005 Nargis Dutt Award another advertising agency called ASP for Best Feature Film on National (Advertising, Sales and Promotion). Integration for Netaji Subhas Chandra During his advertising years, he directed Bose: The Forgotten Hero over 900 sponsored documentaries and advertising films. Film Fare Awards and International Awards Between 1966 and 1973, Shyam also taught at the Film and Television • 1980 Best Director for Junoon Institute of India (FTII), Pune, and twice and 1982 Best Director for served as the institute's chairman, Kalyug: Nominated (1980‐83) and (1989‐92). By this time he • 1976: Golden Palm: Nishant: already started making documentaries. Nominated for Cannes Film One of his early documentaries A Child Festival of the Streets (1967) garnered him wide • 1974 Golden Berlin Bear for acclaim, in all he has made over 70 Ankur: Nominated for Berlin documentary and short films. Soon, he International Film Festival was awarded the Homi Bhabha • Moscow International Film Fellowship (1970‐72), which allowed Festival : 1981 Golden Prize: him to work at the Children Television Kalyug ; 1997 Golden St. George: Workshop, New York, and later at : Nominated Boston's WGBH‐TV. Honours Several films of Shyam Benegal won 1970 Homi Bhabha Fellowship (1970‐72) Best Feature Film Awards: some o them 1976 Padma Shri are Ankur (1975); Nishant(1976); 1989 Sovietland Nehru Award Manthan(1976); Bhumika (1978); 1991 Padma Bhushan Junoon (1979); Arohan (1982); 2006 Dadasaheb Phalke Award Nehru(1984) ; Satyajit Ray, Filmmaker (1985) ; Trikaal (1986); Suraj Ka Satvan