logo

Discussion

Get ready, the Cold War is really over!

When the terrorist attack took place in America, people of the whole world were sad and outraged. The shock and condemnation was so intense that even the supporters of Bin Laden and his terrorist outfit were on the defensive and initially tried to down-play their role in the incident. Gauging the public mood, the President of Pakistan General Musharraf, who had till date provided moral and material support to the Taliban, ventured to take side with the Americans. Many thought at that time that the President might not survive the internal dissent and revolt. Time has proven all such speculations and doubts wrong.

Although, by and larger people were outraged by the death of innocent people at the World Trade Centre, they did not trust President Bush and his rhetoric of ”war against terrorism.” There was general scepticism about Bush’s aggressive assertions and people asked for restraint and rationality. This was true not only of European liberals or anti-Americans of the Third World, but also many others like the US Senator Barbara Lee, who said, ”Bush’s blank cheque puts more innocent lives at risk.”

All this has become matters of the past however. Sometimes in history, events move so fast that yesterday’s incident looks like the happenings of a different age. But there is little doubt that the world before and after the bombing of Afghanistan has changed at its core.

What has been the net result of the Afghan war, and how far was the war able to achieve its original goal? When bombs began pounding Afghanistan, Bush declared belligerently that he wanted Bin Laden; dead or alive. Nevertheless, not only is there no news of Bin Laden, even Mullah Omar or any of his ministers are yet to be caught. On the other hand, there is no first hand account of the civilian causalities due to the bombing, which was reportedly quite high. there is no information about the populace, which was In very vulnerable conditions due to continuous drought and a twenty-year-long war. Most of the aid agencies were quite concerned about a few million people who were facing hunger and death even before the war had started. No one knows whether those people have perished or are alive.

Earlier, there was a country known for its repressive laws and excesses. Now the same country has become the playing field for international powers. Earlier we knew that the Taliban were ruling the country. Now nobody knows who is ruling. The interim Prime Minister (a former CIA man and an ex-employee of a US energy corporation) Hamid Karzai is fast loosing political control. The law and order situation even in and around Kabul is said to be dismal. The other day, the aviation and tourism minister, Abdul Rahamani was lynched to death in the presence of thousnds of people. The crowd was angry and frustrated with the government for failing to take a decision regarding the Haj pilgrims. The interim Prime Minister has accused his colleagues and security men for the incident. This is only a grim reminder of what the region is heading towards.

Now with Bush’s discovery of the ”axis of evil,” the war against terrorism has entered a new phase. Though this phase too is basically an extension of the US President’s earlier announcement: ”those who are not with us are against us,” still, it is now clear that America is all out to settle its long pending scores with other countries. It also demands unquestionable loyalty and wants to dominate. The three countries called evil are: North Korea, Iran and Iraq, who have nothing in common other than that all three defied American hegemony. The regional issues have acquired international prominence and global shareholders are now active in the region.

The so-called ‘coalition against terrorism’ is now cracking and partners have begun to distance themselves from American priority. The EU has not agreed to the Bush’s ”axis of evil” theory. The French Prime Minister is on record with the statement that the American insistence that all world problems are related to terrorism is erroneous.

However, America is clear about its target and goal. Recently, addressing the Council on Foreign Relation in Washington, the US Vice-president Dick Chesney, rebuked the allies in no uncertain terms. He said Mr. Bush was determined to press on and stop the ”evil axis” from developing weapons of mass destruction. Russia has started looking for new alliances. China is critical and has flayed the Bush administration for its utterance. India and Pakistan are desperately trying to lure America and are inextricably caught up with each other. Palestine-Israeli strife has reached a flash point. Amidst all this, the tussle and competition to control the oil reservoir of Afghanistan is increasingly intensifying. With the American military base in the region , and its uncontrollable desire to control the region as well as have the final say in energy-distribution, we are definitely heading for some hot wars after fifty years of cold war.

Media News

Chomsky gheraoed by Yuva Morcha activists

Prof. Noam Chomsky and his wife Mrs.Carol Chomsky, in their visit to India in November 2001, arrived at the Kadappakada Sports Club and Readig Room to inaugurate the V.Gangadharan Study and Research Centre of the club.

While they were being led inside by office-bearers of the club and other prominent people – including the Kollam MP, Mn P. Rajendran, the Rajya Sabha member, Mr. N. K. Premachandran and CPl(M) leader, Mr. M. A. Baby – to unveil the plaque, about a dozen Bharatiya Janata Yuva Morcha (BIYM) activists rushed towards him shouting slogans.

The demonstrators rushed towards Prof. Chomsky waving BJP flags and shouting ”Chomsky go back” Carrying placards which read ”Arrest ISI agent Chomsky”, they tried to prevent him from moving forward.

The two policemen posted at the venue struggled to keep the demonstrators at bay. Volunteers from the club rushed to the scene and formed a protective cordon around Prof. Chomsky and his wife. Mr. Rajendran pushed himself into the fray and prevented the demonstrators from disrupting the function. Kollam RDO, Dr B. Ashok, also present at the scene, meanwhile coaxed the demonstrators out of the club compound. By then police reinforcements arrived and the protesters were arrested.

Later, in his inaugural speech, Prof. Chomsky said that he sincerely hoped the centre would be a model to other such institutions around the world. He said that the enthusiasm shown by the promoters of the club gave him hope sin this regard.

The Kollam MP, Mr. Rajendran, and the Rajya Sabha Member, Mr. N. K. Premachandran, registered their strong protest against the incident. Mr Rajendran told press persons that the intention was to disrupt the function. ”Only CIA spies can feel that Prof. Chomsky is an ISI agent” he said, adding that through the demonstration the BJP and the BIYM have insulted the people of Kollam and that the BJP should make it clear whether the demonstration against Prof. Chomsky was endorsed by the party.

Rajendra Yadav taken to court by UP regional media in-charge

Mr. Rajendra Yadav has been taken to court by the supporters of the Hindutva brigade on charges of anti-national act and treason.

The renowned  Hindi writer and editor of Hans, a reputed Hindi magazine founded by Munshi Premchand, recently wrote in his editorial that “Hanuman was the first terrorist who burnt down Ravana’s kingdom in Lanka. If Shivaji was not a guerrilla warrior, then what was he? In the last century, from Bhindranwale to Prabhakaran – all have been terrorists. Doordarshan has been telecasting India’s Most Wanted programme in which it has been showing photographs of Naxalites when actually it should have been photographs of Bal Thackeray, Advani, Sudarshan, Ashok Singhal and Vinay Katiyar.”

The UP BJP regional media incharge(Avadh Prant) Narendra Singh Rana, reacting to such statements, filed a public interest litigation in the court of the chief judicial magistrate. The petition was admitted.

Mr.Rana, in his petition, pleaded that the controversial article has hurt the sentiments of the Hindu majority community and by terming national leaders as “terrorists”, the writer has committed an anti-National act. Further, he pleaded that the accused be ordered to leave the country immediately on charges of treason.

Effort to end uncertainty around UNI

Scores of UNI journalists assembled at their headquarters in New Delhi on December 8, 2001 to find out ways to initiate proper discussions and undertake concrete actions in the face of an atmosphere of uncertainty about the future of UNI in general and a marked decline in the quality of our news operations in particular.

This informal meeting, attended by senior leaders of the UNI Employees Federation as well as the UNI Workers Union, including Mr. M.V. Sasidharan, Mr. Jaspal Singh Sidhu and Mr. Mukesh Kaushik, reached a consensus on several issues that are raising questions about the future of UNI.

As the main production of the company is news, the house agreed, a greater responsibility lies on journalists to do a1l what is possible for them on the basis of collective wisdom, so that a proper action plan is undertaken by a1l concerned to not only overcome the uncertainties, but also to strengthen the organization.

It was also agreed that a concerted attempt should be made so that the role of UNI as a news agency is re-defined,  keeping in view the technological and other changes witnessed in the various spheres of the media in the country. It was resolved that the post of Chief Editor in UNI must be restored. It was also agreed that a11 non-journalists staff in the organization must be re-deployed in a way that they can supplement and compliment the news operation. Finally, UNI should diversify its products.

As an action plan all the employees of the organization have been requested to prepare a one-page written note expressing what to their mind ails UNI and what is to be done immediately to strengthen the organization. A committee will be formed under the Chairmanship of a retired journalist of UNI to compile and present an action plan based on this feedback. It has also been decided that UNI workers Union will host an al1 India convention in March, 2002.

(Chandra Prakash Jha)

Call to stop military support to Nepal

At a conference against emergency and external intervention in Nepal ( New Delhi, 17 December, 2001),  leading authors, journalists, human rights activists and people associated with various public organisations of Delhi have criticised the military aid being provided by the Indian  government to its Nepali counterpart for oppressing the Maoist rebels and have demanded that it must be stopped immediately. In a conference  organised at Gandhi Peace Foundation, various speakers termed the Indian action as interference in the internal affairs of Nepal. An appeal has also been made to Deuba government to immediately lift the emergency and restart the process of dialogue with the Maoists so that a peaceful solution can be found.

While acknowledging the impending threat of US imperialism in South Asia, the eminent Hindi writer Kamleshwar pointed out that pro-Hindutva forces are posing greater danger as they are bent upon imposing their kind of Hindutva in the Nepal.

Describing the Maoists as the political force engaged in bringing about social change, he said it is a part of American conspiracy to call them terrorists. Shri Kamleshwar said that Nepali culture has no place for the growth of terrorism, therefore to call the political movement of Nepalese people a terrorist act is insult to them. While pointing out that though presently only arms and other facilities are being provided  by the Indian Government, he expressed his apprehension that in a civil war like situation, Indian army may also be sent there.

Shri Kamleshwar further said that it appears that a conspiracy is being hatched by the Pro-Hindutva elements in India and Nepal. He also said that people’s voice should not be confused with that of the Government since both are different. He also called upon all sections of society to protest against the wrong policies of the government.

Suggesting that the Indian foreign policy is being totally guided by the US, senior journalist Anand Swaroop Verma regretted that the Indian Foreign Minister Jaswant Singh had to name the Maoist as terrorists immediately after returning from US visit in September, while the Nepalese government was still naming them ‘Maoist rebels’ and was busy in organising third rounds of talks with them. Even people in Nepal felt offended by the statement of Indian foreign minister and condemned it.

Analysing in detail the South Asian scenario, Shri Verma said that by opting to be dictated by the US imperialism, the Indian government has even endangered the sovereignity of the nation. He further said that  Maoist uprising is a political issue and to deal with it militarily would be suicidal.

Journalist Anil Chamaria pointed out that the Indian government is not only supplying arms to Nepalese government but has also started harassing the Nepali residents in India. Any Nepali  resident in India participating in political activities is being labelled ‘Maoist’ and then subjected to police harassment. He cited the example of five Nepalese residents of  Rajnagar area of New Delhi who were arrested and subsequently taken to undisclosed destination. These Nepalese are still untraceable.

Shri N.D. Pancholi from “Citizens for Democracy’ and Shri Aurobindo Ghose from “People’s Rights Organisation’ expressed concern over the imposition of emergency and subsequent violation of  human rights in Nepal. Shri Pancholi said that while the Monster of Terrorism is being created, no one is trying to analyse the factors leading to the situation in Nepal. On the contrary in its shadow, efforts are being made to suppress the popular uprising,

Shri Aurobindo Ghose blamed multinational corporations for creating war-like situations in different regions so that they could have access to the markets for their ammunitions. He said that the Indian government is trying to establish its military presence in Nepal as a puppet of US government.

Representative of the news publication ‘Nepali Awaj’, Shri.P. Chhetri focussed on genesis of Maoist movement in Nepal and alleged that the imposition of  emergency was an act of  cowardice aimed at throttling popular support to the Maoists. He also criticised the Indian government’s support to the emergency in Nepal and pointed out that many of the present day ministers in the Indian government took shelter in Nepal during the emergency rule in India. Shri Chettri also said that the Maoist’s demand for a constituent assembly is a democratic demand and must be fulfilled,

Shri Anand Patwardhan was of the opinion that it is for the people of  Nepal to decide what form of government they want. He called upon all democratic forces to demand immediate cessation of interference in the internal affairs of Nepal by the Indian government and to discontinue supply of armaments to the Deuba government as these arms were being misused by the Nepali government against its own people.

Dr. Anoop Saraya said that the way Indian Government is publicising the existence of ISI bases in Nepal is enough reason to believe that it has a long term military design in Nepal. He expressed apprehension that in the name of destroying ISI bases the Indian government might send the army to Nepal which will ultimately be used in the oppression of Maoists.

Senior Hindi writer, Rajendra Yadav, said he is least surprised by the role played by the Indian government. Criticising the US-dependent foreign policy of India he said that it is beyond comprehension as to how a nation giving shelter to the Dalai Lama against the wishes of its neighbour can blame its neighboring countries for hatching a conspiracy against it.

In the end Shri Yadav put a resolution on behalf of the conference criticising the role of Indian government in providing support to the military campaign against Maoists in Nepal. The resolution also demanded an immediate stop to the interference in Nepal’s internal affairs by the Indian government. It also appealed to Deuba government to lift emergency immediately and restart the dialogue process with Maoists whose all the three demands regarding creation of Republic, elections to the New Constituent Assembly and the formation of an interim government are democratic.

Global Media

US pressures Al-Jazeera

The International Press Institute (IPI) and the Committee to Protect Journalists (CPJ) expressed dismay last week at reports that the US State Department put pressure on the government of Qatar to influence the news cooperage of independent Qatar based satellite channel Al-Jazeera. According to CPJ, the privately owned station, which is the most popular television channel in the Arab world, has been accused of airing anti-American views, particularly in the wake of the 11 September terrorist attacks in the United States.

On 3 October 2001, United States Secretary of State Colin Powell met with the emir of Qatar Sheikh Hamad bill Khalifa al-Thani, asking him to use his influence to pressure the station into softening its coverage, says IPI. The US State Department complained that Al-Jazeera was repeatedly airing a 1998 interview featuring Osama bin Laden, and that it reported that US Special Forces troops were recently attacked by tine Taliban in Afghanistan, according to CPJ. ”The US State Department is seeking to sanitize reporting and is denying individuals the right to receive information as protected by Article 19 of the United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights,” declared IPI in a letter to Powell.

Ironically, IPI points out that last year, the US State Department characterized Al-Jazeera in its 2000 Human Rights Report as a ”privately owned satellite television channel (that) operates freely”.

Since the start of the United States- led bombing of Afghanistan on 7 October, the satellite channel – which is the only foreign broadcaster permitted in Afghanistan – has broken a string of exclusive stories on the situation inside Afghanistan, including a videotaped statement by bin Laden released shortly after the bombings began.

In an interview with Al-Jazeera an tel’ his meeting with Powell, Sheikh Hamad said he viewed the US government’s request as ”advice” and  would pledge Qatar’s full co-operation according to the British Broadcasting Corporation(BBC).

The attempt by the US State Department to control Al-Jazeera’s media coverage follows an incident some time ago in which it tried to prevent the federal broadcaster, Voice of America, from airing a programme that featured an interview with the leader of the Taliban regime Mullah Mohammed Omar. Although the programme was eventually aired, the move raised fears that American media organisations were being pressured by officials  into falling in line with US government policy.

News or propaganda?

Most wars have been accompanied by propaganda, before, during and after the event- the last as official history after the dust has settled and the conquerors (or peace keepers) move in. The Pentagon has been perfecting techniques of controlling information since the Vietnam war. The first test, and so far, the greatest victory, for the New World Order spin-masters was the Persian Gulf war. Daily press briefings evolved into carefully crafted propaganda sessions.

Controlling the information released to the media shapes public perception of the news. All events are fitted into a framework projecting the conflict as one of good against evil – the righteous US pitted against the Taliban or Milosevic or Iraq or Norvegia..

A common element runs through the bombings of Afghanistan and Kosovo(1999). Both saw a huge refugee crisis, but the portrayal is vastly different. Leave aside, for the moment whether this was  due to ethnic cleansing or bombing raids in Kosovo, the media played up the plight of refugees. Interviews, coverage of refugee columns and appeals for food and money were the common themes.

Compare this to the coverage of Afghan refugees. According to the Red Cross, over two million refugees are headed for Pakistan, but many have been turned away. Where are the camera crews in Pakistan refugee camps? This is a larger refugee crisis than in Kosovo. Where is the non stop coverage, complete with commentary on the cruelty of war? When the families of the dead are interviewed, or give accounts of being bombed in their sleep, the officials are quick with their response: “numbers of civilian casualties can’t be independently verified” – a phrase seldom heard in the Kosovo conflict.

Images are powerful things. Americans see people suffering on TV, and they don’t like it. If they see too many images of Afghan refugees fleeing US bombs or digging for dead relatives in the remains of a hospital hit by a bomb, they might realise that this war is not just.

Source: Internet

Abu Jamal’s death sentence overturned

Abu Jamal, a black activist and journalist’s death sentence is now withheld. The court ordered that the state should conduct a new hearing within 180 days or impose a sentence of life imprisonment. In 1982, Abu was convicted for killing a white Philadelphia police officer, Daniel Faulkner. The case has been contested in the courts for nearly 20 years, making Abu one of the world’s best known death row inmate. Unlike most death row inmates, Abu Jamal, has been an aggressive and charismatic spokesman for his own cause. He has attracted supporters all around the world and become a symbol of racial inequities and other injustices of the American death penalty. The judge’s ruling was greeted as only a partial victory by Abu Jamal’s supporters, who have been fighting for the reversal of his conviction.

SAARC is dead, What’s the way forward?

Sujit Ghosh

After the outrageous attack on the Indian Parliament on December 13, there was high tension in the region and an unprecedented military build up on both sides of the border. Mounting a diplomatic pressure on Pakistan, India called its High Commissioner back tend later suspended the Samjhauta Express and Delhi-Lahore bus service. India saw the attack as a direct challenge to its political sovereignty. Almost al1 the political parties supported the government’s action to contain terrorism. The tension and rhetoric were escalated to such an ex- tent that international forces initiated efforts to persuade both the sides to not go for any untoward action. USA put pressure on Pakistan to take concrete steps against the terrorist organizations in its territory. India was also persuaded to recognise the efforts made by’ Pakistan. The USA has now emerged as a major reconciler and mediator in South Asia. Although India has, in the past, rejected the role of a third party, today it is looking to America for support and intervention. One riddle, however, remains unresolved: why did Pakistan engineer the December 13 attack, the timing of which was not very favourable for Pakistan? In fact, after the attack, Pakistan cantle under severe Pressure and relented as well as took many actions, which it would not have done other- wise. Any one can see that the attack went against Pakistan’s military rulers and weakened its international and domestic positions. While the deployment of forces at the border continues, chances of war have receded considerably. Probably, this is the time to do some plain thinking regarding the mess we are in, in South Asia.

We should ask ourselves why, in South Asia, do we readily interfere in a neighbouring country’s internal affairs and try to fish in the troubled waters? Why do we not discourage anti- neighbour feelings in our own country, rather than reinforce them? Why do we fail to solve our domestic problems – communal, ethnic, and linguistic?

The records of both Pakistan and India, for friendship for their neighbours, are far from satisfactory. India nourished and helped LTTE for years, before sending its army to contain them. The South Asian countries look at each other with suspicion. The border between Bangladesh and India is still not demarcated properly, which has been a bone of contention for a long time. Last year, tension escalated to a dangerous level when 20 Indian BSF soldiers were killed. Anti-Indian feeling in Nepal is quite widespread.

Though Pakistan failed to practice functional democracy in its own country, it is very concerned about the democratic rights of the Kashmiri people. It is still grappling with the problems of regional inequalities and participation of Sindhis, Muhajirs and Pakthuns in governance. Apart from regional discontent, religious strife takes thousands of lives in Pakistan. Killing innocent people during namaz in the Mosques has become a frequent occurrence in Pakistan. While the system of governance is so fragile in Pakistan, one wonders why its interest in India’s domestic problems is so acute (India, though, is not completely innocent in this regard)?

Today if the Kashmir problem has become so very complicated and reached a dead-end, it is because of Pakistan’s political and military interference. It is a well known fact that in the early 80′s, Pakistan eliminated Jammu Kashmir Liberation Front (JKLF) cadres and leaders to establish Hizbul’s authority. The JKLF was a secular outfit that always campaigned for an independent Kashmir and never bowed to Pakistan’s designs.

This is not to say that we are holy. In fact, as a nation, our record in solving minority, ethnic and regional problems is abysmal. Even if we leave aside the problems of the north-east that re- were relatively manageable. Kashmir was accessed to the Indian state in spite of many pulls and pressures. An agreement was signed between India and Sheikh Abdullah on the gradual assimilation of Kashmir into India. It was the Sheikh and his followers who thwarted an attempted the tribes to invade Kashmir. In spite of that, we not only flouted the agreement, but also completely undermined the democratic process. Sheikh Abdullah was put behind bars for 20 years and elections became a mockery. It is said that after one general election, Nehru told Ghulam Baksh that he could have lost atheist a few seats to the opposition! When last year the J&K Assembly passed a resolution demanding more autonomy, an unprecedented uproar was created. Farooq was called a traitor and the Central Government turned down the resolution without looking at it. The RSS and Bal Thackeray demanded stringent action against the National Conference leader. It is surprising that the Government, which is ready to talk to Pakistan about Kashmir, is not willing to do so with the people of Kashmir.

This year, the SAARC summit has passed a resolution against terrorism. It is said to be a victory for the Indian Government, which was advocating for the same after the December 13 at- tack. Interestingly, Pakistan also supported the resolution with full enthusiasm. Ironically, SAARC has acted like an associate organization of USA and its friends, drawing its agenda from the concerns of the West. What one fails to explain is that if a1l the heads of states are denouncing terror- ism, then who is responsible for it? No doubt, there is something fundamentally hypocritical and non-transparent in the whole summit. It is sad that in South Asia, we have failed to take any positive initiative to build up better understanding between the States. SAARC, that is supposed to underline such a need, has gone completely haywire. Due to our colonial hangover, we tend to look upon the West as the arbitrator and saviour.

What are the geo-political problems that we face the most? In reality, in this region, religion and ethnic strife are tearing society apart. Moreover, if the tension in one-country affects the other, we should realise that our fate, destination and destruction are all tied together. lf Tamils in India feel concerned about Sri Lankan Tamils, if Muslims of Pakistan and Bangladesh are appalled at the demolition of the Babri Masjid, if the attack on Hindus In Bangladesh make the Hindu Bengalis in India restive, the writing on the wall is clear. It should be tackled by all means. It may not necessarily be profitable for the ruling elite in any of the countries, because they need an agenda for elections in UP or to justify military rule and ways to suppress democratic rights. But the citizens of this continent are aware that poverty, underdevelopment and backwardness are the real issues of the region; and that victimization of various minorities and ethnic groups should be stopped immediately. Only then can one hope for peace and prosperity. This should be the agenda of bodies like SAARC. Terrorism is only a symptom; it is not the disease.

Twelve ways the media misrepresent violence

Norwegian peace studies professor Johann Galtung has laid out twelve points of concern where journalism often goes wrong when dealing with violence. Each implicitly suggests more explicit remedies.

1. Decontextualising violence: focusing on the irrational without looking at the reasons for unresolved conflicts and polarization.

2. Dualism: reducing the number of parties in a conflict to two, when often more are involved. Stories that just focus on internal developments often ignore such outside or ”external” forces as foreign governments and transnational companies.

3. Manicheanism: portraying one side as good and demonizing the the: as ”evil ”

4. Armageddon: presenting violence as inevitable, omitting alternatives.

5. Focusing on individual acts of violence while avoiding structural causes, like poverty, government neglect, and military or police repression.

6. Confusion: focusing only on the conflict arena (i.e battlefield or location of violent incidents) but not on the forces and factors that influence the violence.

7. Excluding and omitting the bereaved, thus never explaining why there are ants of revenge and spirals of violence.

8. Failure to explore the causes of escalation and the impact of media coverage itself.

9. Failure to explore the goals of outside interventionists, especially big powers

10. Failure to explore peace proposals and offer images of peaceful outcomes.

11. Confusing cease-fires and negotiations with actual peace.

12. Omitting reconciliation: conflicts tend to re-emerge if attention is not paid to efforts to heal fractured societies. When news about attempts to resolve conflicts are absent, fatalism is reinforced. That can help engender even more violence, when people have no images or information about possible peaceful outcomes and the promise of healing.

Source: Action # 239, Nov 2001

Anand Patwardhan ‘s films under attack

The screenings of Anand Patwardhan’s films have yet again come under attack by right-wing ”Hindu” organizations and individuals, this time in the US. Most recently, a letter writing campaign was launched to ban the screening of two of Patwardhan’s films: ‘?In the Name of God” and ”We are not your Monkeys” at the American Museum of Natural History (AMNH) in New York originally scheduled for Feb. 9, 2002. Among the reasons alleged, protesters claim that Patwardhan’s films are ”anti-Hindu.”

On Jan. 22, 2002, a petition was initiated to counter the efforts by right-wing ”Hindu” organizations and individuals to ban the screening of Patwardhan’s films at the AMNH. On Jan. 31, 2002, Ms. Laurel Kendall from the AMNH informed the sponsor of this petition that the screening of Patwardhan’s films had been ”cancelled owing to threats of violence” after this petition was sent to the AMNH with 461 signatures. On Feb 1, 2002, Ms. Kendall retracted her statement and explained that the ”screenings have been postponed owing to capacity issues” and that the films would be screened at a location outside the museums  resumably due to concerns of safety for museum visitors.

The objective of the petition was to request the AMNH to screen the two films at the AMNH (with police protection if necessary) rather than succumbing to ”threats of violence” by right-wing ”Hindu” forces. This petition will be a continuous one, to be reused whenever the screenings of films by Patwardhan come under attack in the future.

According to latest updates, the museum cancelled the Feb 9 screening due to fear of ”threats of violence” from unidentified callers, but is now hiding behind the excuse of ”Capacity issues” (”we expect huge crowds, hence outside venue”).

Reflection

The Indian New Wave

Shohini Ghosh

Pasts and Futures

The origins of the Indian New Wave, perhaps India’s most significant film movement – which is predominantly state sponsored cinema – can be traced to 1969 with Mrinal Sen’s Bhuvan Shome and Mani Kaul’s Uski Roti , The New Wave (with its attempt to recall the French Nouvelle Vague) attempted to posit a counter to Popular mainstream cinema that was faulted as lacking ”realism” and ”authenticity”. The rise of the New Indian Cinema sought to correct this anomaly. Inaugurating a new cinema of ”authencity” and ”realism”, it saw itself as an agent of social change and as an articulating a ”progressive, national consciousness.”

In the late ’60s and early ’70s the New Cinema was identified with financial support from the Film Finance Corporation (FFC), that in 1980 became the National Film Development Corporation (NFDC) having incorporated the Indian Motion Picture Export Corporation (IMPEC). Controlled initially by the Ministry of Finance the FFC in 1964 was brought under the Ministry of Information and Broad- casting. Driven by Indira Gandhi during the National Emergency, the Parliamentary Committee’s instructions to the FFC were to fund films that demonstrated:

• Human interest in the story
• Indianness in Theme and Approach
• Characters with Whom Audiences can Identify
• Dramatic Content
• Background Capability of the applicant

Over a period of six years the FFC financed over 50 films including some Satyajit Ray classics. The arrival of the New Wave (variously called the Parallel Cinema, New Indian Cinema and Middle Indian Cinema) was marked by an almost consistent hostility with mainstream popular cinema. Mainstream practitioners accused the New Wave of being ”arthouse” and financially non-viable. On its part, the New Cinema sought to move away from the aesthetics of popular cinema by rejecting ”commercial ingredients” in favour of social critique. The New Wave saw the emergence of a diverse group of filmmakers like Shyam Benegal, Govind Nihalani, Ketan Mehta, Kumar Shahani, Saeed Mirza, Mani Kaul, Awtar Kaul and Rabindra Dharmraj, along with regional filmmakers like Aravindan, Adoor Gopalakrishnan, Girish Kesaravalli, Gautam Ghosh, Utpalendu Chakrabarty and Jabbar Patel.

Along with the directors, the New Cinema had many ”authors” in cinematographers and scriptwriters. One such important ”author” was eminent Marathi playwright Vijay Tendulkar. Satyadev Dubey’s experimental Shantata! Court Chalu Aahe (1971) was based on the original play by Tendulkar. Apart from the films of Benegal and Nihalani, he scripted Saamna (1975), Sinhasan (1979) and Umbartha/subah (1981). Jabbar Patel directed the last three films. Umbartha (Threshold/ 1981) starring Smita Patil is perhaps the New Wave’s most self- conscious attempt to address the women’s question.

Perhaps the best known name of the New Wave is Shyam Benegal who shot to fame with his first feature film Ankur (The Seedling) in 1974. A man of wide-ranging interests in the arts, Benegal came into feature film making with extensive experience in advertising . Nishant (Nights End/1975) and Manthan (The Churning/1967) are only two films from a prolific career that continues even today. Along with their predecessor Ankur, both films defined the contours of the early New Wave.

The release of Nishant coincided with the declaration of the National Emergency (1975-1977) while Manthan was made during its imposition. Based on an original screenplay by Tendulkar, Nishant is set in 1945 and in what the opening credits describe as ”a feudal state”. The storyline is fairly uncomplicated. The feudal landowning family abducts the wife of a new school teacher in the village in one of the many instances of their tyranny over villagers. The schoolmaster runs from pillar to post but none of the representatives of the state feel compelled to take action. Finally the village priest and the schoolteacher devote themselves to mobilizing the villagers who, in the final sequence, storm the haveli and wreak terrible vengeance.

On revisiting the film, two thematic concerns emerge as particularly provocative. The anarchic spectacle of the peasant uprising during the climax of the film and the representation of the two women Sushila (Shabana Azmi) and Rukmini (Smita Patil). As film scholar Madhav Prasad accurately points out the ”unsaid of the text” is the communist-led Telengana armed uprising of the peasants in the early 1940′s. Benegal, who was deeply influenced by Telengana, evokes a cinematic spectacle of mass rage and destruction. Yet, the catalyst of the mass uprising Sushila, the abducted wife of the schoolteacher flees with her tormenters from those who have come to liberate her. A subject of brutal and repeated gang rapes in the feudal family, Sushila uses her agency not to resist her oppressors but to become one with them. For a cinema that was ”new” and on the cutting edge of film culture, this presents a troubling formulation. Particularly because it’s arrival coincides with the first phases of feminism. ‘The New Cinema’s representation of women continued to vex feminists despite powerful exceptions like Mandi, Mirch Masala and the contentious Umbartha.

Manthan replaces the anarchic spectacle of mass uprising with a developmentalist faith in the sureness of gradual social change. Apart from the mythic resonance, the title refers literally to the ”churning” of milk and by extension to that of society. Co- scripted by Tendulkar and D.V. Kurien of the Gujarat Milk Cooperative, Manthan is best known today for its novel method of funding. As the opening credits show 500,000 farmers of Gujarat present the film. The NDDB (National Dairy Development Board) was set up in 1965 to regularize milk cooperatives and increase their productivity with new technology. The film was made at a time when the NDDB was under attack for aggravating foreign debt and diverting re- sources meant for the rural poor. Made and released during the imposition of the Emergency, to which the film makes many allusions to, the hopeful conclusion of the film can be read as exuding a certain faith in people’s ability to rise above oppression. Such an impulse was being articulated, ironically or otherwise, during a historical moment that witnessed large-scale violation of civil rights and brutal state violence.

A central contradiction of the New Wave was that it had gained credence as being ”anti-establishment” when it was being funded and facilitated by the establishment. In 1981, Raghunath Rains, Director, Directorate of Film Festivals wrote:

What really distinguishes the New Indian Cinema is a definitive set of liberal-humanitarian values, embracing progressive solutions to urgent problems, sensitivity to the poor and oppressed and a faith in the ultimate movement of man towards change. Drawing inspiration largely from the nee-realists, it is cinema of social significance and artistic sincerity, presenting a modern, humanist perspective, more durable than the fantasy world of popular film.

This is an ironical statement in retrospect. The New Wave failed to create a constituency of interested audiences or establish a tradition of financial viability. Screened more at festivals and art house cinemas halls a11 over the country, the New Wave lost the very population it sought to speak for. Today the fantasy world of popular films has far outlived the ”cinema of significance.”

Film scholarship apart, does the New Wave have anything to teach contemporary filmmakers? Ashish Nandy has argued that in contemporary India, the ”imagination of the village is collapsing.” The village now exists as only ”demographic and statistical datum.” He points out accurately that a film like Pather Panchali would never get funding today. This observation is largely true of contemporary films where the presence of the urban has almost totally elided the village. Amir Khan’s successful Lagaan reclaimed the creative imagination of the village but only under the rubric of a ”period film”. As middle-class concerns and urban markers of global- ization proliferate our visual cultures, the erasure of the village from the cinematic imagination can only get more acute. For those who feel that such a move is an impoverishment, the rural parables of the Indian New Wave will return with greater resonance.

Architectural Ancestors of “Urban Terror”

The limited popular appeal of then New Wave may have had something to do with its bleak and ‘realist’ vision. Notwithstanding exceptions like Ketan Mehta’s Mirch Masala, that escaped the confines of ‘realism’ by deriving imaginatively from folk traditions, most Indian New Wave films settled for either pessimism or restrained optimism. Understandably, such a cinema of ‘realism’ and ‘futility’ exhausted the very people it sought to represent. In addressing the notion of ‘realism’ Sudhir Kakkar points out that (when) dogmatic rationalists dismiss Hindi films as unrealistic and complain that their plots strain credibility and their characters stretch the limits of the believable,  this condescending  judgement is based on a restricted notion of  reality. To limit and reduce the real to that which can be demonstrated as factual is to  evacuate the domain of the psychologically real. On the contrary the very simplifiers of artificiality in Bombay cinema (songs, dances, masquerades and excesses) provide greater space for the expression of subjectivity and unconscious operations than a rigid fidelity to ‘realism.’ Herein lies the success of popular cinema.

Strictly speaking the Indian New Wave disappearing at least in the form that it appeared, in the mid- eighties. I would like to suggest that the concerns and preoccupations did not die an unconditional death but began to be re- cast within the devices of popular cinema. Displaying enormous staying power, both Benegal and Nihalani have tempted to recast their own style of filmmaking. (Unfortunately, Trikaa l one of Benegal’s best attempts to transcend both the devices of popular cinema and the new wave’s tropes of realism did not get the popular or critica1 support it deserved.) The nineties saw several films that reworked and converged popular cinema and New Wave impulses. Prakash Jha’s Mrityudand for instance combined the New Wave’s commitment to the realpolitic with popular cinema’s fantasmatic imaginings. Here, 1/11 briefly examine how Aakrosh and Ardh Satya by Govind Nihalani anticipate certain popular films of the late-eighties and nineties.

As star cinematographer of the Indian New Wave, Nihalani was one of its significant visual ”authors”. Hav- ing shot a large number of ad films and documentaries, he launched his career as a cinematographer with Satyadev Dubey’s Shantatal Court Chalu Aahe (Silence! The Court is in Session, 1971) directed by Satyadev Dubey. He directed his first film Aakrosh in 1980 and continues to make films even today. Inspired by the political thrillers of Costa Gavras, Aakros h and Ardh Satya deploy multiple camera positions and rapid cutting thereby making a break with the slower narratives of the past. Aakrosh and Ardh Satya inaugurate a ‘second ‘base’ within the Indian New Wave. The films of the ”second phase” mark definite stylistic departures with the narratives acquiring greater pace, nobility and complexity.

I suggest that the films of Govind Nihalani introduce a more ‘urban’ representative mode than the films of the First phase’. Inspired by a real incident that happened in Bhiwandi, Vijay ‘endulkar scripted Aakrosh against a backdrop of rural India. (The film was shot on 16mm and blown-up to 35mm. It’s rural setting notwithstanding, the film is distinctly urban in its sensibility deriving its impetus from urban crime and political thrillers. The nobility and pace of the narrative is further layered with a noiresque use of light and shade. These traces would be developed further in his next film, Ardh Satya .

The protagonists of Aakrosh and Ardh Satya , are representatives of the state (a lawyer and policeman respectively) who attempt to deliver justice to those who are less fortunate. Consequently, the protagonists are so entrapped in larger labyrinthine machinations that even mere survival becomes difficult. Bhaskar Kulkarni in Lakrosh is a young lawyer who is eager to win his first case. He defends, Lahanya Bhiku (Om Puri) a tribal man who has been accused of murdering his own wife. To Kulkarni’s's shock and disappointment, Bhiku refuses to peak even in his own defence. His amusable and determined silence becomes a powerful metaphor for the enormous gap between the power elite and the adivasis. Bhiku’s silence leads ‘vulkarni to search for the story elsewhere. In the process of ‘unlearning’ the ”facts” that have been presented a court, he becomes gradually politicized. As he begins to excavate the repressed remains of the story, he is relentlessly pursued, harassed and assaulted. Ironically, as his life and career become increasingly insecure, he becomes more confident and determined about pursuing the case. Bhaskar Kulkarni’s heroism lies not in that he will never win. Throughout the film there is s sense of lurking danger and imminent violence. The inexcusability of violence leading to inevitable devastation has remained a central preoccupation for Nihalani.

Set against the cityscape of Bombay, the violence in Ardh Satya is simultaneously physical and psychological. Police officer Anant Walenkar (Om Puri) is both a perpetrator and subject of violence. As a victim of familial and professional violence, he is both horrified and fascinated by it. Caught between his own uncontrolled rage and his genuine desire to liberate himself from it, he begins to resemble his moral adversaries. In the films of Nihalani, machismo, power, sexuality and self-image become integrally linked to violence. Ardh Satya for instance, meditates self-consciously on masculinity as defining the self-image of the male protagonist as well as being inextricably bound to systems of power. Maleness and masculinity here, threaten not just women (who are traditionally paraded as tortured victims of male violence) but as being primarily destructive for those who have the privilege to perform it. This idea is forcefully explored through the conmunal violence depicted in Tamas , his ‘I’V series on the Partition.

Perhaps of al1 the New Wave filmmakers, Govind Nihalani’s films most impacted on popular mainstream cinema. His influence (derived conscious1y or otherwise) can be acutely felt in the action/spectacle films of the late eighties and nineties. Ardh Satya directly anticipates the policeman-as-protagonist films of the nineties. In the latter half of the nineties, the man in uniform emerges as an urban warrior, who is both a representative and an opponent of the state. In films like Yeshwant, Sheol, Ghaath, Kurukshetra, and Farz the police officer is caught in an indeterminate, liminal space both within and outside the 1aw as legality and criminality become embodied in state institutions. These films comprise a strand of cinema that develops more fully in the late ei ghties and nineties. I call this experience evoking a sense of entrapment and dystopias exile. Propelled initially by the angry-young-man films of Bachchan and in later films like Arjun, Goonj, Ghayal and Gardish , the street emerges as a crucial site of terror and danger. The nineties ”tlrban terror” films become direct legatees of the Nihalani tradition. Emerging out of action/spectacle representative modes and incorporating newer tech- nological innovations, the violence in Urban Terror films become greatly’ visceral and intensified. (Compare the tracking shots of Aakrosh and z’trffll Satya with the endlessly fluid journeys of the Steadicam in Satya )

The two biggest hits Satya and Vaastav mark a return to a cinema of regenerated ”realism”. Both Satya and Vaastav (respectively translated as ”Truth” and ”Reality”) recall the New Wave’s concern for a ”truer reflection” of ”real life” along with a dystopias vision of violence. Both Ardh Satya and Vaastav self- consciously invoke the myth of Abhimanyu: the son of Arjun who breaks into the maze but is unable to escape alive. Like the Nihalani films, both Satya and Vaastav reject the utopian vision of violence (Cinephiles might like to compare the suddens execution by Lahanya Bhikhu at the climax of Ardh Satya with the equally sudden execution of Bhiku Mhatre during the climactic moments of Satya. Both films refuse to distinguish between lawkeepers/lawbreakers, victims/ perpetrators, and heroes/villains.

Nihalani returns to his preoccupation with systemic corruption and urban violence in Thakshak in 1999. Takshak ’s  mode of production, representation and distribution are firmly embedded in the traditions of Bombay popular cinema: that critically derided mode of filmmaking against which the New Wave was born. This conclusive move not only makes irrelevant the distinctions of popular and parallel but also proves yet again that no ‘auteur’ is greater than those for whom films are made.

Shohini Ghosh is Reader, Video & TV production, AJK Mass Communication Research Centre, Jamia Millia Islamia

Impressions

September 11^th

Bani Singh

Many of us have grown up familiar with Hollywood films. Among the popular formula films, one is the story of the poor immigrant, sailing towards the land of opportunity beckoned and often welcomed by the statue of liberty. The saga unravels romantically and we cheer on for our hero who fearlessly fights and ultimately overcomes all obstacles thrown in the way of passion, love and hope.

In America, dreams can become reality, many say and America fascinates us. We may choose to love it, hate it or emulate it but we can rarely ignore it. Besides being the only super power now, the US of A still is the most popular destination for immigrants from all over the world and an American disaster affects many lives and families away from its shores.

On September 11^th, I was in Minneapolis and like most people saw the umbelievable story unfold on the television screen like the trailer of a diabolic, blockbuster Hollywood film. Only this was for real. The well dressed professional news readers, fast changing images… the first tower on fire..a jumbo crashing into the second.. catchy slogans.. America under attack.. war on America, the twin towers unbelievably coming down one by one and the emotional trauma of the people missing, night long vigils, candles, flowers and the brave heroes of the NYFD

Given the seriousness of the above events it would have been logical to cancel my trip to New York on the 13^th but the ‘desi’ in me having had an exposure to terrorism in India, felt secure in the knowledge that the next disaster would not take place in NY and that the planes were probably the safest now. Also it was an opportunity to visit New York and experience first hand what the television screens were trying to ‘bring home’ to the rest of the world.

The plane to NY, the first after a gap of almost 3 days had about 35 passengers on board. The airport has been tense with security, shuffling feet and nervous passengers. We felt like comrades in arms, if America was at war then the airports and planes were the war zones and I was heading to the front line!

As we flew in over NY the pilot announced, “ … and to your right is the great city of Manhattan, towering even in its time of grief..” I was already looking out through the window and saw the smoke spiralling above the site of the landmark WTC buildings. The image had become reality and I felt stunned.

The towers in their absence were even more present now and I silently prayed for the lives lost and families bereaved. The precision of the operation made the terrorist attack frightening. The ‘symbols’ had been removed surgically with no mistake and the ice-cold determination of the perpetuators sent a shudder down my back.

I had visited NY only once before and had instantly fallen in love with the city. New York was not America’s; it belonged to the world. Its energy was different. Within half an hour of walking on its streets you could hear three different languages and after two days may find yourself giving directions to another visitor. People from many different nationalities proudly call themselves New Yorkers and the city has a palpable pulse perceived in the hustle bustle of its streets and dependable subway. It was exciting and racy with a hypnotic appeal.

But this time, it seemed jolted out of its confidence. The ‘invincible’ also had a soft underbelly and the ‘enemy’ knew it.

“… America under Attack…” but who was the enemy? And where were they? How could this happen? America so far had not faced the sort of terrorism a lot of third world countries now accept as part and parcel of life, this experience was terrifying. Death is a common phenomenon but rarely do we choose to examine it while alive and now it was in the face of a culture that had put the might and right of the individual above all else. I felt this time in NY was historical, never would I see it so vulnerable and unsure of itself. For a brief instant the ‘walls’ were down and the confusion, hurt and fear was palpable. But surely, the walls would come up again.

Broadway was deserted on Saturday night. The theatres had cancelled their shows and most night-clubs had also downed their shutters. So the big lights were off and instead of the usual razzmatazz, there were only a few stragglers on the street.

Times Square on the other hand was awash with the American flag. A sea of red, white and blue, dazzling in scale and animation, with patriotic messages such as ‘God Bless America’ woven into the picturescape.

There were more people here. Some, like me, were there out of sheer curiosity, groups  had gathered around photographs of the missing people, and some others were walking around as usual, blunting the terrorist’s aim of frightening people to abandon their normal activities. But in the atmosphere was shock and sadness.

Walking with a friend in Central Park, the next day seemed like a normal enough Sunday. It had its usual crowd of joggers, performers and groups playing football. We stopped at a dance-skating performance and were just beginning to relax in its ambience, when one of the dancers requested the crowd to observe a one-minute silence in respect of the heroes of NYFD. This was followed by the Ameriacn anthem at the end of which people somberly moved on. The music had meanwhile changed to John Lennon’s ‘Imagine’ and at one end of the makeshift stage stood a man holding out American flags to people as the fled past.

The American flag had become a symbol to rally behind in the ‘fight against terrorism’, but I found it threatening, it excluded me. The world has to fight the scourge of terrorism together but there are no quick answers. What did a terrorist look like? In this case, he did not seem to be white or black. But brown?

You could be Turkish, Arabic, Afghani, Pakistani or Indian, but being brown was not such a good choice. Brown with a beard was worse and if you also wore a turban it could be advisable for health reasons to carry a placard stating that you were not a follower of the Taliban if not Osama himself.

An innocent Sikh gentleman was killed in a case of mistaken identity by some angry men put to prove that they would stand up against terrorism, and the New York Times had called this act of murder an unfortunate incident since the Sikhs were not followers of the Taliban.

Even in their moment of grief, the Americans characterized arrogant ignorance. The world may have its problems, but if they did not know of it then it was not worth knowing, as long as the problem was somewhere else.

What had shaken them up about September 11th was that besides its unimaginable blockbuster scale it had happened in America. So now there was a bewildering, angry question as to why do ‘they’ hate us?

Meanwhile, Mayor Giuliani and his dedicated band of workers and volunteers continued working round the clock, inspiring examples of resilience in the face of tragedy.

“…If you want to help, get back to business, watch a play on Broadway.. ‘ the Mayor could be heard on the television screen, coaxing viewers to get back to their normal lives. Normalcy was returning with each passing day as NY bravely tried to put the worst behind it, but from many parts of the city one could still see the smoke spiraling into the sky above the WTC towers even ten days after the attack.

It had been an unforgettable stay in many ways. Unexpected conversations with bus passengers and concern on the part of many New Yorkers when they said, ‘This is not a good time to be a traveller.’ New York had been shocked out of its usual indifference verging on rudeness.

As 1 sat in a taxi, driving towards JFK to catch a flight back to India I was relieved and sad to be leaving. New York could never be the same again. But what would we learn from its grief? I was a stranger in NY but felt a shared bond in its pain. But would I be welcome when I visited it the next time?

I was still contemplating al1 these thoughts as I got off at the airport. I had put my luggage onto a cart and was about to wheel off when the taxi driver got out  f his car and came back towards me. 1 stopped in confusion, thinking that I must have given him the wrong dollar bill when to my pleasant surprise he shook me by the hand and said: “Have a safe journey.”

MISCELLANY

A Concise Lexicon

Of/for the digital commons

By Raqs Media Collective

Raqs Media Collective has formulated a concise lexicon of/for the digial commons as the beginning of a ‘dictionary’, a lexical resource on the commons, that could grow with what other people have to say. Here are interpretations of a few terms from the lexicon. The first part of this lexicon was carried in the last issue of AMT.

Data

Information. Can mean anything from numbers to images, from white noise to noise to sound. A weather report, a portrait, a shadow in surveillance footage, a salary statement, birth and death statistics, a headcount in a gathering of friends, private e-mail, ultra high frequency signals, sale and purchase transactions and the patterns made by pedestrians as they walk in a city – all of this can be and is data. Data, like coal, uranium and other minerals vital to the running of the world economy is mined, processed, refined and sold at a high price. Battlefields, early twenty first century inter-personal relationships and stock exchanges have been known to be hypersensitive to data traffic. Data mining is a major emerging

industry in Delhi. The miners lead very quiet days, and spend long nights coding in low temperature zones called Data Outsourcing Centres”.

Contrarily, the word Data (dâtâ) in Hindi/sanskrit is taken to mean “giver” which suggests that one must always be generous with information, and make gifts of our code, images and ideas. To be stingy with data is to violate an instance of the secret and sacred compacts of homophonic words from different cultural/spatial orbits (dâtâ’ ‘in Hindi and data in English) as they meet in the liminal zone between languages, in the thicket of the sound of quotidian slips of the tongue. Errors in transmission and understanding too carry gifts and data.

Ensemble

The  conceit or delight in togetherness in an increasingly anomic, fragmented world. Playing or working together to create finished or unfinished works. Chamber musicians, criminals, code-hackers and documentarists form ensembles. Artists try to. Effective ensembles are high bandwidth assemblies that build into their own architecture portals for random access into themselves. They are, when they are at their best, open systems that place a premium on shared information within them. They can at times maintain high levels of secrecy while seemingly appearing to be transparent. Here, confidentiality is an index of practices, in gestation. Mined data is, sometimes, restored to natural states of information entropy in data dissembling ensembles, which have been found to work best at night in media labs . The Raqs Media Collective is an ensemble and everything it does is an ensemble of existing or anticipated practices.

Fractal

The self – organising design of repeating, replicating structures, often found in snowflakes, tree branch growth patterns, molecular structures and free code. Every part of a frontal pattern carries within it the signature or the emboss of the whole. A single fractal iteration carries within it the kernels of all others of its kind. Every fractal is a rescenssion of every other fractal that has grown from within it. In the same way a fragment of free code, or free cultural code, carries within it a myriad possibilities of its own reproduction and dispersal within a shared symbolic or information space. Fractals best describe the geometry of the matrices that are  formed when data is shared instead of being just mined and shipped by a community of coders. Fractals are the fruit trees of the unconscious designing mind.

For the complete lexicon, contact:

Raqs Media Collective

e-mail: raqs@giasdl01.vsnl.net.in

Feature

The Censor Within (Part II)

Ammu Joseph

The first part of this article on gender based censorship as experienced by women creative writers in Indian languages, appeared in the last issue of AMT. Following is the concluding part. The article was first published by the Hindu (www.hinduonnet.com)

Cultural Constraints

Discussions at all the workshops suggested that choice of subject or theme was also restricted by other considerations. For instance, virtually all the writers across the country were in agreement about the fact that certain topics were more or less taboo for women to tackle: sex, religion and politics.

Extensive and intensive discussions took place on the difficulties of writing on issues, experiences,thoughts and feelings related to sex and sexuality. The ”good girl syndrome” was clearly in operation in this context. While some writers were of the opinion that too much was made of writing on sex these days, others proposed that it was not always necessary to write about it in an explicit manner. ”When we are walking about wearing clothes’ is there any need to write nakedly on paper?” queried an Urdu writer. ”I write about love, not lust” said a Kannada writer.

However, it was clear that many writers felt constrained by their inabilitv to express their thoughts and feelings on what they saw as an important anti problematic aspect of human life. This was one ”area of evasion ” as an English writer put it, in which self-censorship seemed to rule, with many opting to keep sexuality out of their work for the sake of family and friends, and to avoid the risk of being identified with the characters they wrote tryout. ”We still consider it good for women to be frigid” said one writer, in a wry comment on the social mores  which make women hesitate to express themselves on sexual matters.

A Gujarati writer who has written a three-act play on a woman’s experience and perception of sex and its impact on her marriage, said she did not have the courage to get it published: ”l say to myself – where is the need? Just continue to walk along the rajmarg. Write of -good things’ and people will respect you. All is fine as long as they do not know what’s actually going on in your mind, what you actually feel.”

Of the few who had explored subjects related to sex and sexuality in their writing, most paid for their temerity in one way or another. Some faced problems in their personal relationships, others had to contend with gossip and innuendo at the workplace or in the public sphere, and several faced censure from critics.

A Hindi writer was actually, formally arrested some years ago on the round of ”obscenity” for one passage in a novel, which exposed the façade of the traditional sexual role prescribed for women. A number of Telugu poems dealing with sexual politics were viciously attacked by the literary establishment. It was evident that problems arose mainly when women’s writing festooned or transgressed ”acceptable” (patriarchal) sexual norms. As an English poet put it, ”It is the politics of sex and not the act of sex” that brings into play the most extreme forms of social censure.

One problem identified by even those who said they were willing to brave adverse reactions and consequences was the absence of appropriate language for exploring sex and sexuality from a woman’s perspective. Several writers spoke of their anxiety to avoid both romanticizing and sensationalizing sex, and to ensure that their attempts at erotic writing did not descend into pornography. Others highlighted another problem with language; many words associated with sex and sexuality conveyed patently patriarchal attitudes, were derogatory to women and/or were otherwise inadequate or unsuitable for communicating women’s thoughts and feelings on the subject. According to many writers, there was an urgent need to innovate and transform language in this context.

Political Pressures

Thanks at least in part to the mobility and access factors, not many women appeared to have tapped the political sphere for subject-matter. However, a few had attempted to write on issues relating to religion only to have their fingers (if not their works) burnt, especially if they took a critical position on matters of faith, custom or tradition.

A Kannada writer had to face public protests over one of her novels which was seen as a misrepresentation of her religion. A number of Gujarati writers said they had received threats when they wrote anything questioning religious practices. Others said they had refrained from publicly criticising religious customs that they found abhorrent for fear of attracting the ire of conmunity leaders if they ”disturbed the beehive”’ as one of them put it. A Marathi writer found it difficult to explain the tremendous pressure she was under on account of her exposure and criticism of certain aspects of the religious institution to which she belonged.

The current, communalized atmosphere in the country has not helped matters. Many writers have found that their own religious identity was brought to the fore whether or not they liked it and identified with it. For instance, two English writers found that their criticism of the Hindutva brand of communalism or particular Hindu lattices was seen as something ”only a Hindu could have written.” One Gujarati writer recalled the death threats she received for writing an appreciative review of a poem by another woman which dealt with changing relationships within the modern family; letters from enraged readers accused her of trying to break up the traditional Hindu family.

An Urdu poet mentioned several instances in which even apparently progressive editors refused to publish her poems; only some of them were openly critical of fundamentalist trends in religion that were inimical to women but negative meanings which allegedly had the potential to alienate readers were read into the others. According to her, ”Purdah is not only of the body but of the creative self as well. There is a steady and increasing pressure on women from fundamentalist groups to conform to traditional roles and purdah; there is also a systematic attempt at censoring language and thought so that all democratic alternatives are sealed off from women.”

In the wake of recent public controversies over books, plays, films, art and other cultural products, the spectre of street censorship or censorship by mob has turned into a monstrous reality. The violent protests against the films ”Fire” and ”Water” in particular, seemed to have made many writers nervous, especially since both films featured a woman director and questioned patriarchal norms and practices.

lf some writers were under pressure from religious sources, others said they had faced criticism from other types of communities. For example, a number of Dalit writers in different languages revealed that they had encountered objections from Dalit men and organizations when they wrote about the situation of women within their communities. According to a senior Dalit writer from Maharashtra, ”Their argument was that, since ours was such a backward community, we ought to be writing against other forms of social oppression, not against patriarchy. It is more difficult for women writers because we have a dual fight against caste and patriarchy.” Several women shared similar experiences and difficulties in the context of their other identities, too; it became clear that censorship is often exercised by a wide range of institutions, including political parties and progressive movements.

Literary Leverage

The literary establishment came under fire from virtually the entire spectrum of writers for its role in muffling women’s voices. The overwhelming consensus was that writing by women was not taken seriously enough by the predominantly male clubs that make up the literary establishment, and that the patriarchal norms held by decision makers in the literary world ensured that women writers who wished to ”join the club” would try to conform to what was deemed appropriate and acceptable for them in terms of b0th style and substance.

Control obviously operates at different stages and levels. Women writing in a number of languages said they found it difficult to clear the first hurdle: getting published. While some spaces had opened up for women’s writing, especially in magazines and journals, they said, accessing them was not easy and often involved compromise of one kind or another.

A few writers spoke of sexual harassment by editors or publishers. Some decried the fact that women who were regularly published risked gossip about their possible relationship with the concerned (male) editor. Others pointed out that male mentors were sometimes necessary to breach the walls of literary fortresses. Yet others experienced direct censorship by editors and publishers, as well as film- makers and television producers using their work, who changed their stories to make them more ”acceptable.” ”It is as if there is one language for men and another for women”, said a Malayalam writer. Another revealed that she was asked to rewrite a scene in one of her novels because the publisher said readers would not expect or accept such a situation in a book by a respectable writer like her. A Tamil publication changed the conclusion of a story by an established writer on the gloomed that readers would be shocked at the idea of a man  continuing to live with his wife after she was raped. Women were often forced to accept such interference in order to continue being published. ”Half a loaf is better than none,” as one of them put it. But more common was the tendency by writers themselves to become self-conscious and cautious about anything liable to be seen as objectionable by editors, publishers and, of course, critics.

Writers in almost all the workshops waxed eloquent about the negative role often played by powerful – invariably male – literary critics in assessing women’s writing. The choice seemed to be between total neglect, dismissal and belittlement, nit-picking over words, and savage criticism, especially when women transgressed patriarchal roles and rules. Many writers regretted the paucity in most languages of female literary critics with some stature and sensibility, although some seemed to be emerging in most languages.

At the Urdu workshop it was pointed out that when women struggled to express themselves within the boundaries laid out for them, their writing was generally dismissed as ”vegetable curry” (in other words, weak and insipid), but when a few attempted to overcome such barriers, they were attacked for being coarse and vulgar. According to several writers, many critics had rigid notions about women’s writing and based their criticism on stereotypes. ”Is this a woman’s poem?” a Kannada critic reportedly asked about a poem by a woman that he found less than feminine. ”It has no sound of bangles, no scent of flowers.”

Most writers acknowledged the tendency within the literary establishment to isolate and brand women who went beyond what was considered ”decent” writing and conveyed unconventional ideas on sensitive subjects – especially any work that questioned or otherwise threatened traditional ”family values.” According to many writers, since critics and publishers usually had the power to make or break a writer, especially in regional language literatures, their writ generally ran, and this amounted to censorship of an indirect but effective kind.

A number of writers also complained that their writing was unnecessarily and unfairly traced back to male family members or mentors. One Telugu writer, for example, ultimately decided to write only prose because her poetry, although totally different from her writer husband’s, was always assumed to be written or at least influenced by him. Another, who found her prize-winning novel attributed to her father on the ground that she could not possibly have written so convincingly on such a theme, said, ”For my next novel 1 want to choose a subject far removed from my father and my husband so that it will be recognised and accepted as my very own.”

Many writers also spoke of exclusion by literary bodies such as the Sahitya Parishads (quasi-official literary academies). “There is rarely any mention of us as novelists, short story writers, poets or essayists in our own right” said a senior Gujarati writer. ”lf at a11 we are mentioned it is as an afterthought and always as a group rather than as individual, independent voices.” According to another, within the literary press, too, while entire articles were devoted to individual male writers, women writers were generally featured as a group and their work presented in a category such as writings by women this year or this decade’ – as if they and their writing could stand up to scrutiny only when clubbed together.

Market forces

A number of writers also brought up the problems faced by women writers vis a vis the literary marketplaces especially in the context of globalization and the consequent dominance of English as a language, the ascendancy of transnational publishing, and the dictates of international markets. Many seemed to endorse the idea that the market also plays the role of censor in imperceptible ways.

Several language writers highlighted the shrinking readership for literature in their languages, especially among the young, for whom English was the favoured language for education and communication. They expressed fears about the marginalisation of local languages and the trend towards monoculture in creative writing, thanks to the emergence of English as the global language. This, they suggested, was likely to hit women writers the hardest.

To make matters worse, with few women writers being translated into any other Indian language they could not reach out to readers in the rest of the country. One reason cited for the paucity of translation into English, the only way of accessing the national and international markets – was that the ”culture” represented in the works was even more difficult to “translate” than the language itself.

On the other hand, some English writers pointed out that their high visibility on the national stage, thanks to possibly disproportionate media attention, was not necessarily matched by ‘sales, income or popularity; they clarified that only a few writers in English had any hopes of commanding the large advances from foreign publishers that some celebrity authors may have secured. According to them, the problem of polyculture affected them, too, with mainstream publishers often looking for books conforming to one or other of the formulae popularized by the phenomenal successes of one or two Indian women.

Besides, they argued, most English writers could not ever dream of receiving the kind of attention and affection  from readers that many established names in the regional literatures enjoyed as a matter of course. An English poet also pointed out that certain literary genres, such as poetry, that flourish in regional literatures had hardly any audience among English readers. As another poet dramatically put it, ”The voices of poets are totally silenced in English. I feel totally drowned out, completely censored. I might as well lie down and die.”

Subversive Acts

That cry of despair not withstanding, what was most remarkable in all this was the fact that there were so many women of different ages and backgrounds across the country creating literature in every language – despite the somewhat grim realities that a large number of them faced in their lives as women and writers. Also amazing were the different ways in which so many of them managed to get around the various stumbling blocks in their paths to continue living and writing as much and as well as possible under the circumstances.

At times their act: of subversion were practical and simple. For instance, a Gujarati writer whose mother-in-law would not let her read the newspaper, let alone write poetry, managed to find a way to do both. She would read the day’s paper while sieving flour for rotes onto it and use the margins for her poems! A Telugu  writer said she dealt with the problem of time and space by sitting down to write the minute the rest of the family  left the house and resuming housework only when they returned; according to her, she was able to do it with renewed energy after having savoured at least a few hours of peace and creativity.

At other times writers used genre to combat gender. A humour writer suggested that she may have taken to being funny in order to survive th e  domestic oppression she experienced in her life. A number of poets implied that their choice of form was at least partially influenced by the possibility of being oblique in poetry. As a Bengali writer put it, ”Poetry allows for better concealment.” ”Poetry can be used as a shield”’ said a Karmada writer. ”I write whatever 1 want in my poems. I have experimented a lot but have not faced any problems, probably because each reader understands a poem differently.”

Some writers seemed to have found other acceptable ways of dealing with the tension between their need to draw on personal observation  and experience, and their equally compelling desire to maintain the delicate balance of their lives and relationships. According to one Kannada writer, whose stories often featured women who appeared to have lost their minds, the figure of the ”mad” woman served as a device that allowed her to write with a certain degree of freedom about sensitive issues. The reason why her work had not had any negative fallout could be because many people did not fully comprehend al1 that was implied in her writing, she suggested.

The persistence and perseverance with which women continued to write against all odds was evidently linked  to their perception of writing as a virtual lifeline. Many of them said that writing was for them a means of survival. a way of expressing pent-up feelings, of dealing with loneliness and alienation, of handling claustrophobia and frustration, of finding relief from depression and pain. As one Kannada writer put it, “The first novel is to kill demons, the second is to live.” Another said writing was what kept her from going “mad” like many of her characters.

“Writing is like kasauti, an embroidery of memories through which women try to forget their pain and understand their lives,” she said. ”Writing is an outlet for all the questions and dilemmas boiling within me,” said yet another writer. ”I think I would die if I didn’t write.”

At the same time, there seemed to be a widespread feeling that individual struggles were not sufficient. Writers in a1l the workshops spoke of the need to build a sense of community and create a more conducive creative environment for themselves by coming together to form some sort of network for mutual support and encouragement.

Some such organizations already exist at the local or state level. For many Urdu writers of Hyderabad, the Mehfil e Khawateen, an association of women writers that has been in existence since the 1970s, had proved to be a source of support and solidarity. The  Karnataka Lekhakiyara Sangha, a large state-level membership organization, not only provides a forum for women writers to interact but highlights literary achievements by women, although some writers implied that it could play a more proactive role.

While participants in most of the workshops expressed the need for some kind of common platform which could fulfil multiple needs, the writers who attended the Bengali workshop took the initiative to form a collective on the spot and christen it Shoi (a Bangla word with three relevant meanings: woman friend, signature and enduring).

Meanwhile, individual writers continue to stretch the limits imposed by society to live and write on their own terms, as the last verse of a poem by a Kannada writer suggests:

”Breaking out of the dam

You’ve built, swelling

In a thunder storm

Roaring through the land,

Let me live very differently

From you, mother.

Let go, make way.”

(Concluded)

THE PUBLIC SERVICE BROADCASTING TRUST

A not for profit initiative in partnership with

PRASAR BHARATI

Invites proposals for documentary films on

IDEAS THAT HAVE WORKED

For our third commissioning brief and submission procedures visit our website www.psbt.org or write for our InfoBk to PSBT, PO BOX 3264, Nizamuddin East, New Delhi 110013

With a cheque or demand draft drawn on a Delhi Bank for Rs.100/-

Perspective

On the multilayered concept of Jihad

Asghar Ali Engineer

Jihad is projected as if it is integral part of Islam to fight against unbelievers and as if it is the obligatory duty of all Muslims to fight against infidels. To say the least, it is not proper representation of the concept of Jihad in Islam. In fact it is a multi-layered concept which has been projected as a one-dimensional concept – to fight with sword against all infidels. What happened on 11th September 2001 in New York has further given a wrong twist to this very important but complex and multi-dimensional concept of Islam. It must be understood in proper perspective to do full justice to this concept.

Most important thing first of all is to situate the concept of Jihad in its historical situation. What is important is to be historically situated, not historically determined forever. What we often do is to be historically determined without ever probing how we are historically situated. Jihad in the sense of fighting with swords or with whatever weapons of war available should also be understood historically.

The Qur’anic pronouncements are also multi-layered and multi-dimensional, some dimensions are historical, some social, some ethical and some eternal. To understand the Qur’anic verses in uni-dimensional manner is to do great injustice to them and also to misapply them either because of wrong understanding or on account of some selfish motives.

The most important thing in this respect is to understand the pre- Islamic Arab society. Violence and inter-tribal  wars were rampant. Reconciliation and conflict resolution through negotiations was virtually unknown. Though pre-Islamic Arab society was not exactly immoral but as no immoral society would have sound basis to last but it did have tribal traditions and customs which ignored ethical aspects. Peace, though appreciated but was not always practised. As there was no rule of law in pre-Islamic society things  were settled through inter-tribal wars or through tribal customs and traditions. This resulted in great deal of bloodshed.

This prevailing historical situation was not acceptable to Islam but some of its elements did persist in Muslim behaviour. Also, we have to bear in  mind that it was not a modern democratic society but a tribal society with its own outlook and intellectual understanding. We can not apply the modern norms to it nor should we perpetuate its practices in modern times. Islam while constrained to retain some of it rejected most of it and provided for transcendent norms and ethical standards. What some Muslims do (and many non-Muslims too) is to ignore historicity of some Qur’anic and hadith pronouncements and take them in an a-historical sense thus causing great deal of misunderstanding about Islamic ethics of Jihad and makes Jihad a mono-dimensional concept.

A careful study of Qur’an and hadith makes it clear that the concept of jihad is far above mere violence and war. Unfortunately wars persisted in Islamic history for several reasons (but certainly not for religious reasons) and hence it came to be reduced to Islamic teachings. The Sufis who kept themselves aloof from power-struggles and attempts by rulers at territorial expansions realized the danger of misapplying the concept of jihad and they thought it necessary to emphasize other social and moral aspects of jihad. It is for this reason that they described jihad bi al-sayf (i.e. war with sword) as jihad-e-asghar (i.e. small war) and jihad to control ones greed and selfish desires as jihad-e-akbar i.e. great jihad.

This emphasis was greatly needed as the concept of jihad with sword had become quite me-dimensional and was being misapplied for selfish reasons and for inter-group wars among the Muslims. The moral precepts and ethi ca1 constraints imposed by Qur’anic pronouncements were being totally ignored by Muslim rulers and their cohorts to fulfil their greed for power and territorial aggrandisement. It was for this reason that the subs intervened at this stage and tried to bring out moral and ethical dimensions of the rich concept of jihad.

The sufis had not added any thing from their own wish but had based the concept of the great jihad on the basis of the Qur’anic pronouncements. Jihad as is well known to any student of Arabic language means to make utmost efforts. One must look at the authentic Qur’anic dictionary Mufradat al – Qur’an by imam Raghib Asfahani (Urdu trn. By Sheikh Muhammad Abduh Firozpuri, Lahore, 1971).

Imam Raghib first discusses the meaning of its root word jahd which mead working hard or making utmost efforts and juhud which means one’s utmost capacity and two together would mean making utmost efforts to one’s best capacity. Then he goes on to say that jihad wa al-mujahidah means to spend one’s utmost capacity in defending oneself in the face of an enemy. Then he divides jihad in three categories:

1) to fight against enemies i.e. unbelievers;

2) against shaitan (Satan) and

3) against one’s own self i.e. one’s own greed and selfishness.

Imam Raghib also maintains that the Qur’anic verse 22:78 (”And strive hard for Allah with due striving. He has chosen you and has not laid any hardship in religion” ) comprises all these three categories. The Qur’an also says ”And strive hard in Allah’s way with your wealth and your lives. This is better for you, if you know.” (9:41). One also finds in the Qur’an, ”Those who believed and migrated (from their homes), and strove hard ‘Allah’s way with their wealth and their lives, and are much higher in rank with Allah. And it is these that shall triumph.” (9:20)

It will be seen that all these verses in the Qur’an do not use the word jihad in the sense of war but in the sense of striving with wealth and one’s own life. The Muslims were persecuted lot in Mecca and many of them faced severe persecution and strove hard in the way of Allah with their own lives and some of them who were wealthy and spent al1 of their wealth for that cause.  Some of them suffered personally as well as spent of their wealth for the sake of Allah. Thus it was all suffering and striving. This is real jihad. Jihad nowhere in the Qu’ran is used either in the sense of war or for seeking revenge. Seeking revenge amounts to using concept of Jihad for selfish ends if revenge or retaliation is be for ones own group or community.

In hadith literature we find ahadith which prohibit Muslims from seeking revenge. Thus in Sahih al-Bukhari we find hadith of Miqdad ibn Amr a1- Kindi. Amr al-Kindi asked the Holy Prophet (PBUH) ”Suppose I met one of the infidels and we fought. He struck one of my hands with his sword, cut it off and then took refuge in a tree and said, ‘I surrender to Allah’. Could I kill him, O Messenger of Allah, after he

had said this?” Allah’s Messenger (peace be upon him) said, ”you should not kill him” Al-Miqdad said, ”O Allah’s Messenger, but he had cut off my hands, and then he had uttered hose words.” Allah’s Messenger PBUH) replied, ”You should not kill him, and you would be in his position where he had been before uttering these words.”

Thus it will be seen that in matters of war also Islam teaches higher morality the essence of which is not to seek revenge or retaliate. The Prophet (PBUH) makes this abundantly clear in reply to Miqdad bin Amr’s query that the unbeliever surrender’s even after cutting off a Muslim’s hand with his sword, the Muslim should not kill him. Then there will be no difference between a Muslim and an unbeliever.

This is what I call the transcendent morality. The prevailing practice in the pre-Arab society was retaliation in equal measure – nose for nose and eye an eye. But this hadith rejects the concept of retaliation and teaches instead higher morality of pardoning the enemy and magnanimity of treatment.

In matters of jihad Imam Raghib quotes an interesting hadith which says “fight your desires as you fight your enemies.” The sufi concept of jihad-i-akbar i.e. the great jihad is to fight ones own vain desires has been based on this hadith . According to the Qur’an, man’s life is a constant struggle in the way of Allah be it through sword or through one’s hands or through one’s tongue. Thus there is a hadith which says ”strive against unbelievers with your hands and your words.”

Thus this constant jihad , constant struggle in the way of Allah implies again multi-layered efforts. The believers have been charged, by the Qur’an with the important mission of spreading good and fighting evil (amr bi’l ma’ruf wa nahi ‘an al-munkar). In this mission a believer has to engage himself continuously, controlling his own desires, spreading justice, equality and compassion with wisdom ( ‘adl –justice, ihsan – benevolence, rahmah – compassion and hikmah – wisdom are concepts of goodness in the Qur’an which are repeatedly stressed). The goodness of humanity lies in this.

As it is duty of believers to engage themselves in spreading what is good it is also the duty of the believers to engage themselves in containing what is evil. Thus a believer has to constantly strive himself to fight against oppression, injustice, iniquity and cruelty. All these result in spreading evil on the earth. The world as we all know is full of injustices and oppression and it will be a lifetime mission of a believer to contain them. This is real jihad .

Fight is not always with weapons -with sword or with guns. Fight could be through proper means which includes moral and intellectual means – through persuasion, through wisdom, through spreading good word and through setting good examples. It is for this reason that the Prophet has said that the ink of a writer’s pen is more sacred than the blood of a martyr. The word written with ink is more lasting than martyr’s blood.

Jihad is not merely a fight with swords or other weapons. Though jihad also means that but only for self -defence. Jihad is never permitted for aggressive purposes. Then it will not be jihad in any sense of the word at all. The Qur’an is very particular about it. The Qur’an says, ”And fight in the way of Allah against those who fight against you but be not aggressive. Surely Allah loves not the aggressors.” (2:190)

Thus from the above verse two things are clear: 1) fight only those who fight you and 2) do not be aggressive, as Allah does not love aggressors. One has to strictly observe these conditions in jihad. Then it is also to be noted that does not only mean fighting with sword or other weapons. It is constant struggle for whole of one’s life.

The noted Urdu poet Iqbal has beautifully put the meaning of Jihad in day today life in one of his couplets which is as follows:

Yaqin mukham  ‘amal payham muhabbat fatihi ‘alam

Jihad-e- zindagani mein yeh mardon ki shamshiren

The meaning of this verse is that for a man with strong inner conviction and constant efforts and with universe winning love are the real weapons in the jihad of life. The meaning or the essence of the verse is that sword is not the only weapon for jihad . It is but one of the weapons. The real weapons are inner

conviction and constant efforts with love and sensitivity.

It is unfortunate that jihad has been used in Islamic literature in a very narrow and constricted sense. This narrow understanding of jihad must change. The meaning of jihad is not complete without the Qur’anic injunction for believers (men as well as women) to enforce good and contain evil and this is life long mission of a1l the believers and to achieve this objective believers have to use their persuasive skills, wisdom and goodliness. One cannot enforce good with sword. Goodness prevails only with goodness. What the Qur’an calls maw’izah hasanah (i.e. exhortation with goodness) and hikmah (wisdom) is more lasting than enforcing something forcibly.

In war or war-like situation also it is efforts to avert bloodshed and find out ways and means to promote negotiated settlement is far more important. The Prophet (PBUH) always tried a11 possibilities of negotiated settlement and resorted to war in self –defence only if a1l efforts to find a negotiated

settlement failed. The best example of this is what is known in the history of Islam as sulh-i-Hudaibiyah. This is a major contribution by the Prophet of Islam in promoting negotiated settlement and avert needless bloodshed. He even accepted terms, which were not apparently favourable to Muslims. The terms of peace appeared to be even humiliating to his senior companions. The Prophet accepted these terms to avoid human slaughter and in the interest of peace, We find mention of this in Sahih al- Bukhari . Abu Wa’il narrated: ”We were in Siffin and Sahl ibn Hunayf stood up and said, ‘O people! Blame yourselves! We were with the Prophet (PBUH) on the day of Hudaybiyyah, and if we had been called to fight, we should have fought. But Umar ibn al-Khattab came and said, ‘O Allah’s Messenger! Aren’t we in the right and our opponents in the wrong?” Allah’s Messenger said, ‘Yes’. Umar said, ”Then why should we accept hard terms in matters concerning our religion? Shall we return before Allah judges between us and them?” Allah’s Messenger (PBUH) said, O ibn al-Khatta! I am the Messenger of Allah and Allah will never degrade me. ”’

Sulh-Hudaibiyuyah is of fundamental significance in the interest of peace. Peace is the real objective and war only a necessary evil in certain unavoidable situations. Also it is a wrong assumption that it is duty of the Muslims to fight against all non-believers or kafir s. The Qur’an itself mentions about treaties with unbelievers and according to the Qur’an and hadith it is the duty of all Muslims to honour all treaties and alliances with non-believers. All such alliances must be respected by the Muslims until they are honoured by non-Muslims.

Thus we find again in Sahih al-Bukhari, ”The pagans were of two kids as regards their relationship to the Prophet (PBUH) and the Believers. Some of them were those with whom the Prophet was at war and used to fight against, and they used to fight him; the others were those with whom the Prophet (PBUH) made a treaty, and neither did the Prophet fight them, nor did they fight him.

Jihad for social justice

Those who work for social justice are as good as mujahidin i.e. warriors in the way of Allah. Thus we find in Sahih al-Bukhari : The Prophet (PBU) said, ”The one who looks after and works for a widow and for a poor person, is like a warrior fighting for Allah’s cause or like a person who fasts during the day and prays al1 the night.” Abu Hurayrah narrated that the Prophet said as above.

Thus anyone striving for social justice and working for ameliorating the plight of the poor is like a warrior in the way of Allah. Thus those who spend their own money or collect from others and spend for the poor in the way Allah is no less than a mujahid. According to the Qur’an zakat money is to be spent on poor, widows, needy, paying off the debt of indebted and for liberation of slaves. These are all weaker sections of society. It is thus a great merit to help these poorer and weaker sections and to work for them is as meritorious as waging jihad in the way of Allah.

One must remember that much of the conflict in the world is because of poverty, hunger and  unemployment. If these problems are solved much of the conflict will be resolved, One should

wage war against poverty in a1l possible ways – by increasing production, by ringing about redistribution of economic resources and by not allowing wealth to be circulated only among the rich. (59:7)

Even when first permission was given to fight in the Qur’anic verse 4:77’it was basically to defend the  rights of weak from among the o1d men, women and children. In some extreme situations it might mean fighting a war but it could be fight in various other ways, particularly in a democratic and modern society. It could be through democratic movements or parliamentary debates also. In those days when the holy Qur’an was being revealed such possibilities did not exist. Today we will have to creatively re-interpret such Qur’anic provisions as above The ‘Ulama and jurists in early Islam had divided the world in darul herb and darul Islam . The countries where Muslims could not enjoy freedom of their faith and were persecuted were declared by the Muslim jurists as darul harb . And it was thought necessary for Muslims to wage war (jihad ) in such countries. However, it is important to note that the Hanafi jurists had also created a third category of darul aman , i.e. those countries where Muslims, though in minority yet could enjoy freedom of religion and’were not persecuted because of their religious beliefs. India was always considered as darul aman by Islamic jurists as Muslims here were not persecuted by for their religious beliefs. India was always a pluralist society.

But in today’s conditions when democracy prevails even if Muslims are persecuted in any country or any place democratic remedies will have top priority and not waging war and indulge in bloodshed of innocent people. Terrorism which involves shedding blood of innocent people can never be elevated to the category of jihad in any sense of the Qur’anic term.

Also, few individuals cannot get together and decide to wage ‘jihad’ . The decision to wage jihad can be taken only by a properly constituted Islamic government ensuring that there is no other way left but to declare jihad . It could be done after due deliberations and examining a11 possible consequences including loss of human lives. In the modern democratic world such decision can be arrived at only by a duely elected government. And as far as the Qur’anic injunction on jihad is concerned it should not in any case involve any selfish motive like grabbing others territory or consolidating any group’s rule but it should be strictly for higher goals like justice and fighting persecution.

It should also be noted that peace is far more fundamental to Islam than war. War attest could be an instrument of establishing peace in some exceptional circumstances or for defending against aggression. It is unfortunate that some youth come together and decide that there is no way out but to use violence and call it jihad . And these youth ultimately shed great deal of innocent blood without achieving the ultimate objective. Such extremist violence results in more in-group fighting and killing each other. Such extremist violence cannot be entitled to be called jihad.

In modern world real jihad is to use democracy and democratic institutions to realise the noble goals for which the Prophet of Islam struggled a11 through his life peace and social justice

Source.. Islam and Modern Age,
December 2001

Tribute

Whose Iqbal –Ours or theirs

Zafar H.Anjum

In the evening of November the 9^th, a literary and cultural soiree was organised at the Sahitya Akademi auditorium in New Delhi, on the occasion of the 124^th birth anniversary of South Asia’s famous poet and philosopher, Dr. Muhammad Iqbal. ‘The function was organized by the Communicators’ Cooperative India, a collective of media and arts professionals, in remembrance and contemplation of what Iqbal and his works mean to us today, especially as a common heritage of South Asia. The following reportage profiles Iqbal and his life and thoughts in the light of the discussions that took place in the seminar.

Flicking though the television channels last Friday, I happened to pause at P’TV for a few moments, as a vibrant newscaster was announcing the celebration of the birth anniversary of ”their” national poet, Allama lqbal, across Pakistan. It was being discussed with conviction, how Iqbal was really the originator of the idea of Pakistan. At that moment, I found myself humming the tune of ”lab pay aati hai dua ban ke tamanna meri ” a prayer song composed by lqbal that my mother used to sing to me when I was in her lap. I wondered how lqbal could be the originator of Pakistan when I always have thought of him to be ours.

As I came to attend the literary evening on lqbal that day, I heard a similar story. A few years ago, reminisced Professor Naseer Ahmad Khan (Department of Urdu, Jawaharlal Nehru University), when he invited a Pakistani scholar to participate in a seminar on Ghalib, he received a curious reply. The Pakistani scholar wrote back that since Ghalib was an Indian poet, he would not be able to speak on him. However, he expressed his desire to come over to India anyway to hear what Indians had to say on this great ”Indian” poet. Later, on telephone, Dr. Khan asked him who was ”their” poet. ”Iqbal,” said the erudite voice from the other side.

With the partition of India, India’s cultural heritage was partitioned too. Ghalib apparently fell on India’s sided and lqbal was tossed across to Pakistan. When Iqbal died, his grave was in India. After 1947, it became the property of Pakistan.

“If Iqbal belongs to Pakistan just because his grave falls within their geographical boundaries, then what about the Harappan civilization, of which the largest number of sites fall on the other side of the border? Does it make Harrapa a Pakistani heritage only?” asked Dr. Khawaja Ikramuddin of JNU’s Department of Urdu. How can lqbal, who vouchsafed for Hindu-Muslim unity and targeted the exploitative religious figures, be labeled as a Muslim communalist good enough to be exported to Pakistan? How can Iqbal, who said “khak- e –watan ka mujh ko zarra devta hai” [Each dust particle of my motherland is God to me], be considered a poet of the Muslims?

Iqbal has described his dream of a new India in these words:

Sach keh doon aye Brahmin gar tu bura na mane

Tere sanam – qadon ke b’ut ho gaye purane

Sooni padi huyi hai muddat se dil ki basti

Aa ek naya shiwala hum phir se yan bana de’n

Shakti bhi shanty bhi bhakto ke geet me hai

Dharti ke waasiyon ki mukti preet mein hai

Mullahs had issued a fatwa on Iqbal for daring to see this dream for a new India. Yet, after his death, Iqbal was reviled as an Islamic poet. This was Iqbal’s tragedy. ”It is wrong to assume that Iqbal is the poet of Muslims or he belongs to Urdu literature alone. No. Iqbal transcends a1l boundaries. You cannot put him in any category. Like all great poets, he belongs to the whole mankind,” said Professor Abdul Haq.

Allama Iqbal was born in Sialkot in 1877. He learned Arabic and traditional eastern education under the famous scholar Meer Hasan. After MA in Philosophy, he received PhD from Cambridge and German University. He became a Barrister, and for some time he taught Arabic in London University. In 1908, he returned to India and became professor in Lahore. One and half years later he started practicing law. The British government bestowed the title of ”Sir” on him in 1922. In 1926, on the 1930. In 1931, he represented India in  the 2nd Round Table Conference. He died on April 21, 1938.

Pakistan claimed Iqbal after partition – so the argument goes, because he is credited to have originated the idea of Pakistan, a holy land for the Muslims. ”This is not the whole Truth,” said Professor Abdul Haq, an eminent Urdu critic. ”Iqbal foresaw a federal structure for a free India, in which a Muslim-dominated north-western region could be a cultural unit like many others,” he said. As far as the idea of Pakistan is  concerned, Iqbal denied that he was the originator of this idea.  ”Iqbal has clearly denied this in his letters to Raghib Hussain. Nobody talks about these letters as they don’t favour their point of view”’ said Dr. Haq.

”When nations begin to diminish in stature and gallop back to their annihilation, they begin to put things in categories: this is Hindu, this is Muslim, this is this and this is that,” said Dr. Naseer Ahmad Khan of JNU’S Department of Urdu. Iqbal’s being dubbed as a Pakistani or a Muslim poet is a reflection of our intellectual poverty. It is not Iqbal’s personal loss but reflective of our own inadequacies, Dr. Khan added.

”l’m not bothered if Iqbal originated the idea of Pakistan. What matters to me, and should matter to everybody, is how far Iqbal is relevant to us today,” said Professor Mohammad Hasan, an eminent expert on lqbal. He said that lqbal’s greatness, as a poet is undoubted. Along with Ghalib, he is the only poet in any Indian literature who had equal command over two languages: Urdu and Persian.

Dr. Abdul Haq said Iqbal is the most misunderstood poet of the 20^th century. ”We must look at lqbal in totality if we want to understated him,” he said. Iqbal’s tragedy was his poetry was used by different groups to serve their own interests. His poetry had so many facets that he seemed to assume different roles in different phases of his poetry; he was a staunch nationalist, a vocal communist, an advocate of Hindu-Muslim unity, a humanist, a believer in Islamic revivalism, a freedom fighter, and an advocate of international brotherhood. ”No poet in Urdu, and I’m sure in any other Indian language too, has shed as many tears on India’s misery and colonial captivity as Iqbal,” said Dr. Haq.

Iqbal warned his countrymen by these words:

Watan ki fikr kar nadan musibat aane  wali hai

Teri barbadiyon ke mashware hain aasmano me

His poetry is full of patriotic fervor and a pride for India’s ancient civilization. In one of his couplets, Iqbal extolled Ram as the leader of the East. Professor Hasan quoted from his most mature work Hayat-e Jawaid , a couplet where he was travelling in the heavens and saw Prophet Mohammad, Jesus Christ, and Gautam Budhha seated side by side before the Lord God. ”From a Muslim point of view, what Iqbal says in this couplet is sheer apostasy; yet, Iqbal is unfortunately understood as a communalist” said Professor Hasan.

lqbal also seems to be sympathizing with communism. He apparently believed that if you simply add God to the communist philosophy, it becomes Islam. Professor Haq said lqbal had the gall to put Marx on the pedestal of prophethood. He quoted a line from Iqbal wherein he had said that though Marx was not a prophet, but he had the book (Das Kapital) like the revealed ones No wonder then, the Russian Revolution of 1917 prepared the background for themes of capitalist system and jostling of labour class in his poem Khidr Rah . He presented revolutionary views before moderate leaders. He conveyed the message to class of laborers to get organized and unified.

Get up now that the style of the world has changed. It’s the beginning of your age in the East and West.

Iqbal, while attaining a philosophical height in his poetry, was also writing “Decree of God to Angels” for the youths.

Get up and wake the poor of my world. Shake the doors and walls of the rich’s places. Iqbal was unhappy with the situations of the Muslims in the world. Everywhere they were lorded over by the colonialists. In one of his poems depicting the political situation of a particular Period, he addresses Muslims saying Allah has bestowed upon you with al1 qualities, you are the best people, you have to lead the whole world. So, regenerate the qualities of valor, justice, and truth in yourself.

Read the lesson again of valor, of justice, of truth.

You will be required to lead the world.

Talking about Iqbal being branded a communalist, Professor Haq said, ”It is unjust to label Iqbal a communalist. Every thinker, philosopher and creative artist turns to spiritual resources in his later live. The same also happened with Iqbal. Do we talk about the communalism of Aurobindo? Being religious does not mean being a communalist. You are communal only when you talk about harming the people of other communities. How can you put Iqbal in that category when he dreamt of building a Naya Shivala and establishing universal brotherhood?”

Iqbal, said Dr. Haq, was the only Urdu poet, and perhaps the only poet in any other Indian literature, who linked the native literature to the world events.

Dr. Hasan said that Iqbal was not without flaws. For example, he did not agree with his views vis-a-vis women. Iqbal does not allow much room for action to women. However, his poetry and his farsightedness cannot be flawed, he urged.

Dr. Hasan said that Iqbal’s entire philosophy can be summed up in one word: Khudi (which have meanings much deeper than simply, ”self”). It is not an Islamic word or Islamic philosophy. It is a mantra of action and struggle for any individual or nation to survive and succeed. That is his message to the world. Iqbal believed in action and continuous struggle. He quoted a Persian couplet which means:

Someone(supposedly a divine voice) asked me, are you happy with the way the world is I said no.

The answer came, then go smash it up and make it the way you wish (it to be)

Iqbal favours Iblees (Devil ) over the angel for his action and his daring to defy Allah’s command. Iqbal’s concept of the Shaitan (devil) is that he is the leader of those who count their destiny responsible for their evil deeds and count their punishment already destined. He complains to Allah:

Harf-e istakbar tere saamne mumkin na tha

Haan magar teri mushiyat me na tha mera sajood

When he is put a question:

Kab khule tujh par yeh raz? Inkaar se pehle ke baad

He answers:

Baad! Aye teri tajalli se kamalat-e -wajood

Then he realizes that he has under stood it after having denied it and he dared to do it because of his weak nature. When you take it forward, we find out that he has envy and jealousy that is why he dislikes man to sit as the viceroy of God. It means that he considers man superior to himself because he complains in Javednama that man easily becomes a prey in his web. This is despite the hope from man that he fights him and tries to dominate him. Therefore, lqbal sees in Iblees a power which helps in the development of man and his world; he alone brings out his best in real life through the struggle of good vs evil. Iblees’ invitation-”defeat me”- is a clear evidence that establishes that he wants to be the prey of a Mard-e Kamil !

(Perfect Man) . Professor Al-e Ahmad Suroor has explained it this way: îblees was in search of the perfect man as he refused to bow before a newborn Adam. It seemed as if Iqbal gained freedom from the devilry interpreting him in this fashion. He had achieved the power of action, faith in truth, self-respect, self-dependence and self-defense.

Teri zindagi isi se teri aabro isi se

Jo rahi khudi to shahi na rahi to ru-siyahi

That Khudi is Iqbal’s universal message. It is not only for the Indians or the Pakistanis, but for the whole mankind to adopt and learn from. People may keep on fighting about lqbal being our heritage or theirs. In his own lifetime, Iqbal had outgrown a11 categories. He is a shared heritage for the whole world.

Dhoondta phirta hoon aye Iqbal apne aapko

Aap hi goya musafir aap hi manzil hun mein

( I keep looking, Oh Iqbal, for myself,

As if I am the traveller as well as the destination itself)

Zafar H. Anjum (with Inputs from Yousuf Saeed)

Visit http://www.cc-india.org for Information about Communicators’ Cooperative

Opinion

An Interview with Anurag Singh and Jharana Jhaveri

We are dispensing with the usual introduction because till date this has been the most difficult interview to edit. Not because it was bad, on the contrary, it was too difficult to cut short. The original transcript is a fascinating 9625 words. Unfortunately, space permits only around 3,000, but we’ll be happy to provide the original transcripts on request. Nevertheless, Anurag and Jharana are well known for their films ”Kaise Jeebo Re” and ”Right to Information, ”for their active involvement in both the struggles and for widely screening their footage and films.

How did you begin?

Jharana : I never had any idea that I was going to make films. But I always loves films. It was something I was attracted to, but only to watch. I was in Poona, I was doing my masters and the institute was there so I used to go watch films nearly everyday. I was studying sociology, social movements. I was very interested in theatre and I was doing my thesis on theatre as an instrument for social transformation. I was interested in symbols and the whole art of it.

Accidentally many years later I went to Bihar. I was a part of the literacy campaign there with a group called Bharat Gyan Vigyan Samiti[BGVS], which is the cultural wing of CPM [Communist Party of India (Marxist)]. This was absolutely North Bihar. I had never been to a village. I really saw a village properly for the first time! All the notions that you’d studied about weren’t working. I discarded them over the year and a half that I spent there. Then we thought that we should document this. And somehow BGVS got interested. I’d met Anurag, seen his film ”Manibeli” and really liked it. And we got talking. We just went. I thought that I’d assist him because I know the area and he knows the craft. But then, we did the film together. And I was hooked.

Did your past help your filmmaking?

Jharana: I think all the other experiences, the analytical faculties that you evolve by your studies, the worldview that you develop, are very useful in whatever work that you do. You have a certain discipline to go into the depth of the subject. The whole association with political movements, environmental  movements and the way one looks at them extended into the work that I do. I guess if I wasn’t doing films I would paint and it would still be the same kind of politics.

And you Anurag?

Anurag : I’ve come here from Madhya Pradesh. Officially, I completed my BA in MP, but it was a very casual kind of  education. I hardly attended classes in school or college for that matter. In MP there were some groups who were  working with disadvantaged people such group. ‘The area has many coal mines, it is a tribal area but a heavily industrialised one as well. They used to work with the labour unions in the industries – they made training material on health, environment, etc. They had a full unit, which used to put up poster exhibitions, slide shows; they had a dark room, cameras, films, etc. So, when I developed an interest, they were happy, as they also needed someone to help them out. Then I came to know about Cendit’s 20-week course and I came here.

Manibeli was your first film. Why Manibeli? You could have chosen a subject in Delhi..

Anurag : Since 1 was a child I was exposed to political struggles like the one in Manibeli. I was always attracted to them. Since that time I also had a deep-rooted hate for the police. I have seen how they behave with people. Even in my school days I used to regularly participate in rallies and protests around Narmada, I knew people who were active in the struggle. I was clear, if I ever made films, I would only make them on such issues.

Generally we see that children of communists become capitalists. What was that that didn’t take you somewhere else?

Anurag : Its not that I did what my father wanted me to. In fact, I never did what my father asked me to. I had lots of fights with him. He felt I should be like him and I wasn’t. I had a lot of complaints against my father because he had brought me to such a place, it was not my decision.

Jharana : Initially they were in Benaras then they came to this tribal area where there was absolutely nothing – from an elite school to a government school with one pair of clothes. So that was the shift that was very difficult. There was a rebellion and that has stayed on.

Anurag : Yes, that has always been so with me. But it is true that the life I have seen, the life of adivasis; I had no the idea of. So, even though I am not completely convinced about what my father does, or what many others do, somewhere I made up my mind that I will never make films for Coke.

When you both begin to  work together, along with shooting, you were also continuously screening your footage. Why did you do that?

Jharana : 1 think for us, if one has to put it briefly and simply, the core is that it’s a mutual process. Filmmaking is not an isolated process – the kind of film that we enjoy making, the kind of films that we understand as documentary, the whole process is one of integrating with your subject and your politics. You can’t say that I am going to sit in my editing room and craft a film. In every incident, in every political event, you intervene. And it is very significant for us to show our films and be part of every audience that watches it.

To understand the points of departure that why should you make a film on them, the point is, why should you dump a dam on them? There is an external factor that has gone into their lives. So if there is an external factor those who have the sophistication to battle with the world need to battle there and other people need to go and support it, understand it in all its dimensions, document it, share it with them at every stage. So we have continued to do so.

It is also very, very exhausting, it is not a romantic idea. Every time there is a dharma, whether you need to film it or not, or they want you to film it. Many a time you escape, but out of ten times, seven times you don’t escape, you have to do it. You want to do it but you can’t always do it because of your own limitations.

For us from the very beginning it was very clear that whatever we earn, we have to become self-reliant. So equipment should be ours, we are not gluing to be dependent on studios, editing, on camera, etc. So, that’s the reason, when .. . way back .. . I don’t remember. . . When We had no money, we used to live with nothings but we had our camera. We had a Hi8 first, then we had a DV camera. And we got an exciting thing also, quite early. Because you can’t do this kind of work if you are dependent on funds studios. Also you can’t do so many versions. Like Medha is going to Brazil and she wants a version. And we have  countless such versions that we don’t even have the memory of. So, at the end you have spent six years on one film, but enroute you have so many other things, you have intervened in so many other ways. I mean 1 don’t justify taking six years as a good thing but we’ve not been able to do it any better (laughs).

How do you work together? I think even two is a crowd, no?

Jharana: I don’t know, I think we just decide one day that today you are going to play the boss, or 1 am going to play the boss. He takes it a little too seriously, I don’t. Basically, for me, it’s important to agree politically at the guts. Secondly, to agree practically compatible if you are working together. Other than that it is basically respect and gentleness, etc. We have these horrible fights, but the point is that there is no distaste, there is no lack of grace, dignity, about each other, abilities of each other, each other’s work.

Anurag, what do you feel about working together?

Anurag: If one agrees on the basics, I don’t see any problem in working together. Yes, there must be aa basic rapport. Even the people I show the work to, they also should have the understanding that perhaps I don’t have answers to all the questions they raise.

Jharana : lt’s been a long journey, and it was very good because we had different skills and we could support each other. It’s been ten years. We also made ten films, but it’s not the films alone but the whole experience.

Its one thing to have ideals, but you also need to survive. How do you manage?

Jharana: I think the fundamental thing is to know what you want to do and why you want to do it. So’ once you are clear on that – the rest follow where you get the money for it and a1l that. And political films – the kind of films that we enjoy making – it’s always somehow been that we have not had to go with a proposal for funds. Maybe we will never do it, I don’t know. And if you do that you are very clear on

what terms you are taking that money. We are very happy to take government money, we think its our money. And we must tell them what film we are making. It’s not that you camouflage it. You can have shades of how you express it, so that it is agreeable to them, but finally you make the film the way you want to make the film. On the other hand you battle with the State, but then the State is not some abstract thing that you hit your hammer against. lt’s also something that you intervene into and make connections with,

And you can’t say that democracy is in threat, or communal forces are taking over the country and not yet intervened. This is where you have your way of saying and sustaining the democratic space that we are al1 talking about. Its not some theory, that space is not going to be carved out for you to just walk into.

So, do you want State support for documentaries?

Jharana : I feel there must be government support in teaching documentary films, in giving space to experiment, to make mistakes. There is no space. Right now what is happening on the TV, like if Coke wants its own ads, the NGOs also want their own ads. I think that the kind of films that the Films Division was making were far better because there was a point of view, that of the government. There was an infrastructure there. There was a consistency. Here, with the NGOs, if they are selling hunger, you have to make a film on hunger, they want to make a film on child prostitution, you turn around and become an expert on child prostitution, or whatever else. If we keep doing this, then the art is not there. And when the reason itself, the basis of making the film, is not because of what you feel or connect to, there’s a problem. You can’t make everything a product in the market.

So if there is a State sponsorship in terms of an independent funding, a structure wherein you can make any film you want to make, there is money, the minimum. Make mistakes, make a bad film, but make a film that you want to make.

And there is no support to teach people filmmaking, there is no support to fund people who are even going to explore that.

Kaise Jeebo Re, your-film on Narmada, how widely has that been shown?

Jharana : Our first agenda, whatever money we get, before we pay back our loan, was to get a projector, because we wanted to show our films. So we bought a projector. We used it in the Narmada valley in Rajasthan, in showed our films ourselves. We went to sixty universities in US with absolutely no money – we just collected money through the hat, asked the organisers or the departments to buy one copy for some money- that’s how we sponsored our entire tour.

Let’s talk numbers for a moment. Can we say you have shown it to 2 lakh people? Or 5 lakhs?

Anurag: Everyone in Narmada has seen it.

So we are talking about 5 to 10 lakh people!

Anurag : See, in all meetings there were 10 to 15,000 people. . . May be that’s the right figure. But in Indore it was shown by many cable operators a number of times, in Barwani too.

So 10 – 15 Iakhs? Conservative estimate?

Anurag & Jharana : Yes.

So you have managed to reach some 15 lakh people in India on your individual

effort, may be with some support from friends. 60 universities in the US, even if

100 people attended each of those screenings.

Jharana : No, no, much more, there were crowds! There were like 7 to 800

people in some of those screenings!

Let’s say 500 in each screening as an average. We are talking about a huge

number of people who have seen your films! And these are serious audiences,

who ask you serious questions. ..

Jharana : And this is apart from the film route. This is the non-film, non-festival audiences we are talking about. The festival route is separate, that also we have done. And this is just on emails. We just sent out information on the email to people that we have made this film. Nobody knew us, we had never done anything before. Just two write ups, nothing more. That went through, and we made a whole route.

But why did you need to go to the US at that point of time?

Jharana: No, we didn’t need to go to the US. The Narmada movement needed to build up support. And to show the film we are willing to do anything. Even if there are four people in a screening we still go and screen the films.

You are saying that the-film helped to crystallize this ”Friends of Narmada” group?

Jharana: Yes, it re-crystallised, because when the World Bank was being fought there was a movement, especially in London and America. But now there was a slack because World Bank left the project. So a lot of new people who were reading, thinking got involved as well along with the older group. But let us put it on records for us the best screening was in Jabalpur when we screened it on 15th of April.

They were sitting on dharna and we had gone there to show the film. And somebody came and said, ”you told our story” and patted me. For me, for us, that was one of the sweetest, greatest rewards.

What is the future of this kind of work?

Anurag : I feel that there is a tremendous need for this kind of work. The kind of things that are going on in there is a need to document these developments and changes. And there is space for that. Earlier there was cinema. Now cinema is so much more accessible on television and people are quite engrossed with al1 kinds of programmes and serials. But I don’t think the magic spell of TV can keep the middle classes from facing the reality for very long. When their own lives won’t any longer be like the life they view on the television. A1l this while the middle classes had considerable support from the State. But with the new kind of developments they won’t be insulated any more. I think there will be a new connection with the middle classes. Take for example the 75,000 factories that were shut down in Delhi. In the earlier context the owners of these units would have been seen as an exploiter with the workers in an opposing position. Now both are in a similar situation. That way many more people would join the movement. And I feel all these stories[around deprivation] –all true stories – will have more importance in the future.

Jharana : Having said that, I think we don’t seem to be really learning. May be I am being harsh. But I think it’s been a long time that we are connected with the world, but our cinema hasn’t. Is our cinema – documentary cinema – connected to the world in a way that really tells our story? The technology is there, the connections are there, but are we going to have the space? The State is also closing in. It is going to

scare away people – younger people. I feel that we are in a really casteism and an elitist business. Unless we look at ourselves and make films about our surroundings, we can’t be honest. Let’s be honest, let’s tell our story. Let’s equip others to tell their stories. We don’t want to do that, we want to tell their stories. That will not work. We have not recognised that on the streets of Delhi thousands are homeless. We don’t make those connections We make the connections in Bargi. There is a connection between Bargi and the people on the streets of Delhi. If you can’t make these connections you will not be able to make the space that Anurag is hoping would be created.

Resources

Some Films by the PSBT

Journey Through the Lines: India Reflects

The film has chronicled the journey of democracy from its nascent stages In Nehru era to recent times of Atal Behari Bajpai through the eyes of cartoonists. The film has interestingly compiled the lines of eminent cartoonists along with their thought processes. From juvenile days of democracy to tougher coalition arrangements, the film has dealt with the best and worst phases of democracy from 1947 to 2000. The film makes an unbiased and hitting statement on the state of democracy in our country.

Film by: Vinay Rai

Chilika – A fragile Ecosystem

Chilika, the largest brackish water lake of Asia lies in the east coast of Orissa: During the last few decades the lagoon is showing signs of degradation as is quite apparent from high sedimentation rate, decrease in salinity concentration level as prolific growth of aquatic weeds, decrease in fish productivity and overall shrinkage of wetland area. The physical changes which are occurring in the wetland as a result of sedimentation is the direct effect of alterations of hydrological regimes and rapid degradation of lagoon catchment. The second equally important reason Is the increasing population in and around the lagoon, disregard for conservation and especially uncontrolled expansion of prawn culture pinto the lagoon, which leas aggravated the physical decline. Both these types of changes pose a major threat to the sustainability of fisheries, wildlife and water quality of the wetland.

But it is the prawn culture which the apple of all discord It has not only spoiled the character of its water but has also been instrumental in spreading violence. Is there a way out of this impasse?

Film by: Nirad N. Mohapatra

Prayers for New Gods

The film is an exploration of the indigenous religion of the tribal groups inhabiting Arunachal Pradesh who have, with time evolved for themselves a set of animistic beliefs and practices that represented a process of interpreting life and coming to terms with tine difficult environment that surrounded them.

The film begins with the celebration of the Phung- Glin festival by the Mijis of West Kameng, which symbolisms an ancient meeting point for the wholly opposite concepts of non-violent Buddhist thought and a system of offering sacrifices to appease spirits.

It then attempts to understand the process of the entry of ‘new’ religions like Christianity and Hinduism that have made inroads even into inaccessible areas. Tribal people, predominantly tribal women, are adopting these organised forms of worship which seem to give an opportunity to leave behind the parameters of tradition in pursuit of something that is more personal and meant beyond mere appeasement of spirits.

On the face of this penetration into so far ‘secure’ realms the consequence has been a resurgence of indigenous faiths like Donyi-poloism in reinvented, contemporary forms. The film, in a sense is an effort to appreciate how tine tribal society is adapting to demands brought on by a globalized sense of God.

Film by: Moji Riba

Pather Chujaeri

Pather Chujaeri explores a crucial question: how does art survive in a regime of fear? Closely interacting with the National Bhand Theatre, Wathora, and the Bhagat Theatre, Akingam, two groups that are still performing in the traditional Pather form of satire in an environment of war, violence and uncertainty, the film shows how an illiterate community has sustained a centuries-old tradition in the face of debilitating social and cultural changes. Although perennially intimidated

by the corruption. violence and intolerance that prevail in Kashmir, the Bhands are still affirming a commitment to their theatre, to the critical potential of its form and the liberating joys of performance. Faith in Sufism has tempered their enthusiasm for satire and they identify with the collective voices of Kashmir’s freedom. Pather Chujaeri follows the two groups as they prepare for public performances, a rare phenomenon today. For the Bhands, who daily witness the erosion of their way of life, each performance represents both a change as well as a repetition of the same brutal fact: that they are not free to share their revolutionary spirit.

Film by: Pankaj R. Kumar

Tell them, the tree they had planted has now grown (Part 1);

What lives here now (Part 2)

When I asked Rahman Dar, our old family retainer in Kashmier, if he had any message to convey to my grandmother and to my parents back home, he told me, “Tell them, the tree they had planted has now grown.”

The evergreen pine tree, planted by my grandmother, is the only sign of life I saw in the barren winterscape of Kashmir. To me it conveys hope and also deep despair. The village hosue in Kashmir where my ancestors lived still stands, but is now lying plundered and abandoned since 1990, when all Kashmiri Pandits were forced to flee from their homes.

This film is an account of my journey of fear, back home to Kashmir after 12 years since I was there last. It is an account of my association with the people and places in Srinagar city, where I grew up. It is about how Kashmiris – Us and Them – view our present situation in Kashmir through our personal perspectives. It is about how our individual perspectives distorted by fear, violence, prejudices and helplessness about our situation, has contributed in loss of peace and sanity in Kashmir.

Film by: Ajay Raina

A community returning to the mainstream

Opening with a dramatic enactment of the case of Budhan Shabar, killed in police custody, as narrated on screen by his widow Shayamali, the film provides a short history of the Kherla Shabars of Purulia, a food gathering-hunting forest tribe who were branded as a criminal tribe by colonial administration in 1871, and even after being renotified by the Government in 1952, bears the stigma and is persecuted by the authorities and their neighbours belonging to other communities.

While the history is narrated by local scholars and activists, present day victims offer evidence and enact slices of their way of life in the early twentieth century, authenticating the documentation. Side by side, images and statements record the community’s rejuvenation under the leadership of the West Bengal Kheria Shabar Kalyan Samiti, particularly through a programme for total education, training in cultivation and irrigation and  handicrafts, organised marketing of their products, self help and cooperative ventures, and the modernization of their traditional skill in archery. The new spokespersons of an evolving community represent a spirit of initiative and commitment. Mahasveta Devi writer and activist associated with the Samiti, appears in the film offering rare insights into the history, character and changing trends in the lifestyle and culture of the community.

Film by: Sandip Ray

Abhimanyu’s Face

Abimanyu’s Face is a documentary about Guru Gambhir Singh’s Chhau troupe, The last of the classical performers, the troupe performs Purulia Chhau, the most martial of the masked Chhau dances, and render their versions of stories from the epic. “The Slaying of Abhimanyu” (from the Mahabharat) is one of their favourite themes, and the film shows how they seem to be haunted with it. As his sons perform, the seventy five year old maestro dreams his dreams …

Film by: Ranjan Palit

Of Life and Death

Maharajin Bua has been ritually cremating the dead at the Rasoolabad Ghat of Allahabad floor the last 75 years. She is now 86 years old and is perhaps the only woman in India who has been performing the last rites for the dead. This is unusual, as according to Hindu tradition women are not allowed to perform this function. Of Life and Death is not a biographical film on Maharajin Bua. Instead it explores the question of the relationship of death to life, our response to death of other people and our own impending death. Do we accept the idea of our own death in our day to day existence? Does living with death of others on a day to day basis make the idea of our own death more acceptable? These questions are articulated partly through an enactment of a story from Kath Upnishad but mainly through the experience of Maharajin Bua.

Film by: K. Bikram Singh

Almoriana

Almoriana documents the events around Dassehra in the Himalayan town of Almora. Each mohalla in the town is busy making their own giant effigies that are ceremonially led through the town and finally burnt. The evenings are taken over by the Ram Lila performances and the streets for a week become transformed into a new public space as people continue to work on the effigies and the carnival spills over into the streets. It is an event where every member of the town participates, regardless of religious affiliations or creed, bringing the town together in this annual celebration.

Film by: Vasudha Joshi

All the above films are approximately of 30 minutes duration and in English. They have been produced by the Public Service Broadcasting Trust (PSBT). VHS copies of these films are available with the PSBT at a price of Rs. 500 each (with discount on orders of 5 films or more). The films are currently being telecast on DD1 every Sunday at 10: 30 p.m.

For further details and copies, contact:
Ms. Tulika Srivastava
PSBT,
A-86, Nizamuddin East, New Delhi 110013
e-mail: psbt@vsnl.com