Showing posts with label Modi. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Modi. Show all posts

Monday, 10 June 2024

Retelling of Ramayana?

The Monkey Man (2024)
Director: Dev Patel

At first look, one is forgiven for thinking it was going to be a non-cerebral offering with senseless violence, gore, pyrotechnics and stunts that defy science principles. On further viewing, one would assume there would be lots of Indian bashing, Hindu culture ridiculing and Modi shaming. It cannot be so wrong.

Far from it, this is also an attempt to retell the Ramayana story. In the Ramayana narration of events around 5000 BCE, King Rama was exiled for 14 years into
 the forest after political arm-twisting led by his stepmother. Raavan became the villain when Rama turned down Ravana's sister, Shurpanakha's sexual advancement. Her antics got her nose slashed off. Raavan kidnapped Rama's wife, Sita. Rama, in search of his missing wife, Sita, befriended Hanuman, and the rest is history, as written by Valmiki and others.

In the Ramayana, Rama and Hanuman are on the side of the truth, whereas Raavan, with his 10 branches of wisdom, assumes the protagonist role. However, this film version deliberately mixes up the roles of the hero and villain.

Monkey Man is a streetfighter who appears regularly at an underground no-holds-barred mixed martial arts fight scene for a measly stash of cash. He has a dark secret from his past for which a score must be settled.

In that town, there is a heartless businesswoman who basically controls all the vices around. The men in power support her activities—the police chief and his yeomen, the strongmen in town, the politicians, and the saffron-robed man of God.

The fighter, @ Bobby, @Kid, grew up as a tribal kid with his loving mother at the edge of the forest, but greedy businessmen ruthlessly burned their house to take over their land. His mother was lit alive by the police chief right in front of his eyes in his childhood - hence the need to avenge.

To build up the climax to the eventual destruction of the corrupt system, the audience is feasted to (or has to sit through, depending on your taste) minutes of swashbuckling and pumping of adrenaline done in the veins of 'Kill Bill', 'War of the Dogs' or any of the Hong Kong fast-paced kungfu movie fast-moving cameras. Actually, the action sequences are of high standards.


The way I see this movie is told is that of a modern tale of Ramayana. A leftist embroiled in anti-Hindu sentiments always looked at modern Rama as an intruder. He intruded on the forest, initially occupied by the Adivasis, to upset their equilibrium by invading their space and hunting their food. In a screwed-up way, in modern-day Ramayana, Ravana is not the lone villain but has joined forces with Rama. Symbolically, Rama is referred to as the safron-clad religious man. He is in cahoots with other branches of power. Allegorically, they are represented in the ten heads of Ravana.

So, Hanuman, as the last man standing, has to go rogue to defend his people. He is Bobby @ Kid, trying to right the wrong, undoing the sins of the religious leaders, tycoons, political leaders, the police and the whole cabal of oppressors of the marginalised.

At the end of the day, even though it was filmed in Batam, Indonesia, the whole show primarily aims to paint India as a lawless country. By repeatedly showing Hindu iconography in many of its frames, it tries to showcase Hindu culture as twisted. Everyone is corrupt, and there can be no redemption.

Is it a mere coincidence that its release is eerily in the year when India, the biggest democracy, is about to re-elect Modi for an unprecedented third time? Still, the movie has a high entertainment quotient and high-value production. It is highly recommended for the curious-minded who do not mind the occasional head-butting. (Or is it butthurt?)

</

Wednesday, 1 May 2024

It's one country!

Article 370 (Hindi; 2024)

Director, Screenplay: Aditya Suhas Jambhale


In some circles, the mention of abrogating Article 370 is a bad word. In their mind, it denotes a loss of independence, dignity, and rights. As complicated as this issue is, it gets more convoluted as time passes, and politicians with personal agendas get intertwined in the imbroglio.

The story of Kashmir goes back to the time of Indian Independence. It is all about religion and whether it should be acceded to India or Pakistan. When Great Britain wanted to give India independence, Kashmir, being a princely state, i.e. run by royalty, was given the option of joining India or Pakistan. The ruler of Jammu and Kashmir, Maharajah Hari Singh, wanted to stay alone. The problem is the ruler was a Hindu in a predominantly Muslim population. The local popular political parties closely associated with Jinnah's Muslim League were adamant about joining Pakistan.

What happened afterwards depends on who tells the story, Indians or Pakistanis. The Indian version is that Pakistani vigilantes, dressed as tribesmen, moved into Kashmir and started commotion. The Pakistanis say the Kashmiri Hindus brought in RSS members and Hindus from the rest of India to tip the Hindu-Muslim balance. Gandhi squarely blamed the Maharajah for mishandling the communal riots that ensued later.

Hari Singh then sought military assistance from India. As per the wish of the majority, as the upheaval was seen solely as Pakistani Army's doing, he signed off the accession of Jammu and Kashmir to India. He abdicated to Bombay after appointing a Governor and a Prime Minister.

The skirmishes between India and Pakistan continued until they engaged in a full-scale war. Even though Kashmir was theirs for control, in his wisdom, Nehru thought that the United Nations should be involved. The UN called for a ceasefire, drew the line of control and divided Kashmir between India and Pakistan in about 2 to 1 ratio.

In 1965, the countries went to war again over Kashmir. This time, Pakistan thought it could stir the sentiments of the Muslims to riot against India. It was called Operation Gibraltar. It again ended in a stalemate after the US and the Soviets appeared as peacemakers, making them sign the Tashkent Declaration.

The fact that Pakistan named the operation Gibraltar is indicative of its vision. As in Islamic history, where the Iberian peninsula was attacked by Muslim invaders from Gibraltar, Pakistanis perceive the whole of Kashmir as legitimately Islamic land that cannot slip away to infidels. That is the bottom line.

Fast forward fifty years later, the country still has not resolved its internal issues. The 1990s saw further deterioration of inter-religious relationships, resulting in massive persecution and exodus of its Hindu population.

From an Indian lens, they see Kashmir as a prodigal child. Even though it is technically Kashmir is part of India, it seems to have special status. It has its own flag. Article 370 was a temporary measure enactment to give autonomy before it got on its feet.

With the passage of time, political wrangling, and internal law manipulation, the article became an entitlement. The ruling class and their lackey seem hellbent on maintaining the status quo, as the BJP saw when it was campaigning to form the Government in 2014.


Modi, could be AI generated!
This film centres around the time when the Government of the day went around trying to repeal the temporary Article 370 to get Kashmir to be under Presidential rule with cloak and dagger method in a cat-and-mouse chase to hoodwink the internal cabal that wants to keep the status quo. The Kashmiri leadership are comfortable with the previous arrangement as it kept them in power and enriched their cronies. 

The film, criticised by many who do not favour the current Government, is said to portray a very right-winged look Hindu look at the whole scenario. It is suggested that the movie is a propaganda piece for the upcoming Indian general election. The film suggests that the Kashmiri leadership is colluding with India's enemy, Pakistan, to uproot the state out of the Union. The battleground is tattered with religious ideology. And money (lots of it) is a lubricant. The ending suggests that things are better in Kashmir after the abrogation. Peace is noticable. Tourism is picking up, and so is hoped, the economy.

The friction has been going on for so long that each person looks at the other as if they are from a different country. This is observed in one of the dialogues, 'It is not about us and them. We are one country!'



Friday, 8 September 2023

A lotus by any other name...

There I was, minding myself performing my daytime duties, when someone approached me.
"Excuse me, where can I meet Mr Rajeev?" 
I scratched my head thinking, "Rajeev, Rajeev…?" 
"Sorry buddy, can't help you there. Don't know any Rajeev." 
Then it hit me. Of course, Majid. Before Majid was Majid, in another life, he was known as Rajeev. 
"Oh yes. I remember now. Ranjeev is on the 1st floor. He is now Majid." I told him. 

Then I left the place thinking… 

A name is for the convenience of others to pick us out of the 8 million people on Earth. If Majid is comfortable with his new name, so be it. We should respect it. It, in no way, changes who Rajeev or, for that matter, Majid is. In the imagery of Avicenna's flying man, he is who he is. 

A new name does not exclude the follies of the previous past, just as Pakistan came to discover. Wanting to carve itself out of the perceived vagaries of its motherland, it realised it could not disentangle itself from the shared history with ex, no matter how much it detects. 

During the Great Game era, Imperialists sliced much of Africa for personal consumption. Imagine, Cecil Rhodes even named a vast piece of land after himself, which years later became a country. Of course, descendants of the initial inhabitants of Rhodesia renamed their country Zimbabwe, after the stone enclosure they used to live, after Independence. After years of being inadvertently referenced to the poultry industry and the colloquial term of a moron, Turkey applied to have its name, or its spelling, altered. Türkiye, as it was written in its Latin script, has become the official name. As we know, Türkiye, in its zest to modernise after the fall of the sick man of Europe, the Ottoman Empire, chose a Latin script over Arabic. That explains the umlaut over its 'u'. 

Konark Sun Temple
Nobody chose to raise the alarm when Czhechia (Czech Republic,1993), Myanmar (Burma, nee Brahmadesh, 1989), Eswatini (Swaziland, 2018) and even Netherlands (Holland, 2020) changed their names. 

The World suddenly looked up when a dinner invitation card to G20 delegates read letterheaded from the President of Bharat, not India as commonly known. To the rest of the World, the name Bharat reminds them of the nationalistic RSS's desire to reinstate India to its ancient name, as mentioned in the old scriptures. To the nationalists, this exercise of renaming old names is a branding exercise to spur its citizens' sense of patriotism. The leftists, who missed the nostalgic days of Fabian Society card-carrying Pandit Nehru, decry the majority's dominance over the minority and the oppressed. In their minds, this move reaffirms their belief that the ruling party is ultra-nationalist, Islamophobic and Hindutva in ideology in wanting to create a Hindu Rajthra. 

A bit of context here. In Indonesian and Malay languages, the word for west is Barat. Since Bharat was a civilisational icon in those days and was situated west of the Malay archipelago, the term 'Barat' was assumed west. Article 1 of the Indian Constitution starts with 'India, that is Bharat, shall be a union of states.' It denotes that both names are interchangeable. A name is for others to use. What others decide to call us sticks with us. Back in the day, the people on the West of the Sindhu River, i.e. Persians, had a problem with the letter 'S'. It simply did not exist in their language. They would refer to the people on the other side as Hindus. This is further exemplified by how they address their God, Ahura Mazda. The people in Bharat also have Asura and Deva. Both their belief systems were not much different - fire temples in Zoroastrianism and Agni pooja in Hinduism. Asura became Ahura. 

A rose, by any other name, smells as fragrant. A lotus, irrelevant to where it grows, appears as pristine. India, or Bharat, will stay as chaotic, colourful, and opinionated as ever, with much culture and wisdom to impart to the World. With its newfound zest, it is going places, including the Moon and the Sun. The name change is merely a branding exercise to remind the World that it catching up after missing the bus that brought the World's first two Industrial Revolutions involving steam and coal, respectively.

P/S. Thanks to Aman for instigating me to write up this piece.

Saturday, 28 January 2023

A propaganda piece

India. The Modi Question (2023)

BBC Documentary (2 episodes)


Around the late 1990s, when I was working in Johor Bahru, I enjoyed the BBC worldwide service radio transmissions from Singapore. At that time, what appears to be an alternate universe to think of it now, their discussions were fair and extensive and looked at topics from all angles. Undoubtedly, their fundamental role in modern society has been exposed over the years. Their reporting of the elusive Weapons of Mass Destruction in Iraq and their many shenanigans are now open secrets. Their job is to be a tool of the US and a lap dog of the military-industrial complex.

A testimony of their rumour-mongering duty is this 2 part BBC documentary. It is an obvious case of biased reporting and ridiculing the choice of the citizens of the world's biggest democracy. Even though the BJP returned the votes with a more significant majority the second time around through what is deemed a fair election, the West cannot fathom the nation they once thought would disintegrate soon after its Independence.

At a time when Europe was in Dark Age, India and China ruled the world. The West stirred from slumber during the Era of Enlightenment, distorted the world order then, and exerted their will over the rest. With so many mischief and arm-twisting manoeuvres, they claimed dominance over the rest. They determined the world narrative and laid the foundation for how everybody should think. This was essentially the order of the day for a good millennium. At least, this is what the current generation is made to believe.

The 20th century saw the turn of the tide of the status quo. The colonised have been jolted off their ignorance. They are eager to reclaim their place in the world order. But the former colonial masters will not take this loss of stature lying down. They are going to put up a fight tooth and nail. BBC, CNN, Al-Jazeera, and other western media outlets quickly prance and sink their claws at former colonies where it hurts most.

2024 is an important year for India. It is when the nation goes to the polls. The world knows the sun has been shining bright on these so-called third-world countries. Economics is a zero-sum game. Profitability on one end means a loss on the other. A strong India is not healthy for the West. Hence, the rapaciousness to run down India and Modi, whose party is pipped to come out victorious in the next polls.

BBC selectively picks up internal problems within the world's most populous nation and puts a religious angle to them. It paints a picture of blood-hungry Hindus dying to sink their teeth into the jugular of the Muslims. The Muslims are portrayed as pitiful victims, never retaliating or casting the first stone in any calamity. An internal problem like the arbitration of Article 370 in India-controlled is made an international issue. The justice system is painted as tainted and working to the puppet strings of Modi. They make a mountain about the 2002 Gujerat riot, accusing Modi of being the master conspirator. To give legality to their presentation, the BBC had sourced the services of Indian sepoys like Arundhati Roy and leftist academicians from the UK.

Come to think of it, the Western Media is just doing what they had been doing all this while, bending public perception and skewing their way of thinking to benefit the West. Voice of America (VOA) was doing the same under the guise of being the voice of the free world.

“Be afraid. Be very afraid.”*