Hindi Cinema
A Secular Perspective
- Ravindra Katyayn
Right from its inception, HindiCinema has been a tool to entertain people. This revolutionary medium hasaffected our lives, our society and our social system a lot. Whether it is onthe social front, or economic, political or religious front, it has gained popularity,earned money and influenced people at large. Filmmakers have used the real lifeexperiences as well as imaginary, mythological, fictional or historical imprintsto express their ideas and translate them creatively into celluloid. This isthe main narrative of Hindi Cinema. It has been depicting the real images ofIndian life and life styles in the most creative, imaginary and fashionable manner.Being the entertainment industry, Indian Cinema has always tried to stick toits main goal of entertaining the people in different ways, failing which itssecond goal of earning profit would be a huge loss. So, creating a film is arazor-sharp fine act, where even the slightest carelessness can be fatal and maycause a huge loss of money, time and labor and create a furor in the societytoo. Moreover, it is also a crime against the audience, who is wasting itsmoney and time if it is not created with the required level of responsibility,and sincerity. Audiences like to be entertained but not to be fooled. Cinema isthe dreams fulfilled for a short time, with a hope of betterment, in a reallife situation.
Hindi Cinema enriches thesefeelings of betterment in the life of a common people. Now it’s up tofilmmakers to make such sensible cinema, which can guide them to a better life.If it is not possible, it can at least entertain in a healthy way. Hindi Cinemaintends to do all these things with a high spirit, but does not always providea healthy entertainment. This is the point where it has troubles, and problemsof various kinds. One of its kinds of problem is the communal shades depictedin Hindi films for whatever reasons. Being a multicultural and plural society,we have always negated communal ideology and aspects and such traits are neverwelcomed. In this paper, the focus is on the communal problems and the biasesrelated to it in Hindi Cinema. We all are aware that this is the very problem,which has caused sufficient loss to the Indian people. Thankfully, these biasesare not many and have never been the main theme of Hindi films. But as asubsidiary theme also, the idea of dividing and distinguishing people on thebase of religion, caste, colour, area, language, nationality and community isvery dangerous and may cause sufficient loss to the people and society. Toevaluate this, first we have to have a glance at the brief history of HindiCinema.
HindiCinema- A Brief History
Pre-Independence era
In order to understand thecommunal/secular perspective of Hindi Cinema, we have to look back at the timeof partition. Before independence, our filmmakers did not show anydifferentiation particular to various communities. Also, there was a hidden agendaof Hindi films to raise voice against British Empire.Though it was never reflected directly due to fear of ban, but it was stronglyflowing as under current. Even after the partition of 1947, there were nocommunal biases reflected in Hindi films. Or we can say that no filmmaker daredto make a film on this burning topic, as the after effect of the partition wasmuch more on the society, both in Indiaand Pakistan.So-called leaders to get political mileage, spitted a lot of venom, whichaffected the people of both countries for a long time and still continuing, butno filmmaker came forward to make a film on this greatest accident/event of ourcountry for many years. Issues like exploitations from Zamindaars, Mahajans,Pundits, Rajas were given top priority in the Hindi films before and afterindependence. These issues have been haunting Indian society since ever, sothey were always a preferred choice for making films. People liked to see allthese real situations on reel and seeing a hero saving the common person fromthe atrocities of such traitors have been a big dream of Indian Cinema. But theissue like communalism has not been highlighted in reel life in this era. Onemore reason for this negligence is that communalism was not present in oursociety with greater volume. It has emerged in full throttle only in lateeighties.
Fifties and Sixties:
Way back in fifties andsixties, the main protagonist of Hindi films, who was a worker in a mill orfactory, had a tough fight with mill and factory owners. There also filmmakersdid not highlight religious or communal sentiments of masses at large, as thiswas not there aim and at the same time this was not a hot issue in real life ofthe society. But filmmakers did have a little fear to portray a Muslimprotagonist as a hero. As they were afraid that audience may not welcome thisstep. This myth was broken by “Chaudavin Ka Chaand" (1960) and "MereMahboob". Audience liked these films. But the main protagonist of thesefilms was a rich, delicate, well cultured, navab like person, who did notresemble the common Muslim man of the country. He was a romantic young, wholiked romancing with rich girls, dancing with her around green trees, makinglove in remote forest houses in case of rains, watching mujaras, enjoying alltypes of super comforts. It was like unlimited dreams. This was the depictionof super life, and was superficial for the common mass of the country. Peopledid enjoy these types of themes on the celluloid but only for three hours. Theywere not made for them, as these did not touch their problems. But, yes thesethemes were welcomed and the Muslim protagonist was established and accepted bypeople against the fear of filmmakers. Moreover, it is to be noted that noperson from other minorities like Christian or Sikh, was selected as a mainhero of Hindi films till then.
In the same year (1960) longawaited historical saga “Mughal-e-Azam” was released. This film was made in 16years (1944-60) with a very big budget of 1.5 cr. And it has been the greatest hit of IndianCinema. Though this film was slated on a historical backdrop, it has greatshade of secular image of Indian people. We can point out on one issue that mostof the crew and technicians were Muslims in this mega blockbuster. Despite this,there were no signs of communal biases in the film and it was K. Asif’s magicthat created history of film making in India. The script was secular inall aspects. Birthday of Lord Krishna was celebrated in the court of KingAkbar, and Madhubala danced like Meera. We will never forget “Mohe panaghat peNandlaal chhed gayo re”. This is the spirit of secular India that such type ofassimilation of Hindu-Muslim culture was not only welcomed but remained an alltime hit. Muhgal-e-Azam was a secular film in true sense, which made this aphenomenal film in the history of Indian films. This also showed that thepeople of Indiaand filmmakers have liked secular traits, not communal. As early in fifties,filmmakers like K. Asif has clearly understood this secular culture- the streamof collective consciousness of Indian society.
Seventies And After:
As the society changed anddeveloped, new issues and problems came in the process. Main protagonist andstory of the Films started changing to the underworld or dacoits. Underworlddons and dacoits hidden in jungles or forests ruled the celluloid in seventies.Shole was the height of these types of plots. After great success of Shole,many films came on the similar trends like Shaan, Don etc. These types of filmswere the result of the changing social system- Naxalite movement and TradeUnions. Naxalite movement wasestablished due to the rising atrocities of the traditional social system,where common people were the ultimate sufferer. The exploitation was heightenedto its peak. As a result, reel hero raised his voice against it, and becamehero for common people. This was a start of angry young man image. But thisangry young man portrayed in Hindi films was fighting with evil peoples ratherthan fighting with evil system. He was a violent character and used all sortsof violence to take personal revenge. Janjeer, Diwaar, Shahanshah, Coolie,Agnipath are the main films which used this angry young man formulae. Afterthis trend, the image of Hindi film hero was shifted to Police or Politicians.They became central theme of the story. Needless to say that they were villainsand this trend again was a reflection of the society. During and after theemergency, lot of socio-politico changes took place, and they invariablyaffected the script of the Hindi cinema. Nineties have witnessed a new shift inthe history of Hindi cinema, where Pakistan and Pakistanisoldier/terrorist/ militant/leader was the real villain. And hero is fightingwith him for personal revenge or for country’s sake.
In the 21st century, this trend againshifted and no one is the villain. Now films with different plots and storiesare successful. Now the role of the story and script is being given very muchimportance. These are just some footprints of Hindi cinema.
Secular approach and HindiCinema:
Dilip Kumar was hero of 1961hit film “Ganga Jamuna”. In the last scene Dilip Kumar died saying “Hey Ram”.Some members of censor board were reluctant to this scene, and wanted to cutit. They did not digest a Muslim saying “Hey Ram” like Gandhiji. Luckily thefilm was shown with the scene and there was no controversy on this very scene.On the contrary the film was a big hit. A person like Dilip Kumar, who haschanged his religious identity by changing his name, has fought againstcommunal forces through out his whole life. Like Dilip Kumar, a number ofpersonalities of Hindi cinema have never bothered to communal thought andalways remained with the very side of plurality.
After eighties, the nationalpolitics of Indiahas played a vital role changeover. Until emergency, the national politics wasnot very diverse. But starting eighties has seen the rise of right wing forceson the national map. And these forces have grown to the corridors ofParliament. This is the reality of our country, of our people. This has affectedour films as well. This is the era, film industry witnessed realism as animportant factor to affect Hindi films. Hindi films have shown the communalbiases in the films as a part of the reality, but they have provided theirsolutions as well. And those are never communal. The main thought of thesefilms is secular in all respect. In real life, common people never likecommunal controversies as they affect them badly. In reel life also this idearemains the same. No common man wants to be communal and fight for someunfruitful things. And this common man knows that these biases are spread bythose who are gaining many things from these- Power, Money, Position and so on.Therefore, films with evil motives are never welcomed and outright rejected bythe audience. If some biases are reflected in the films, they are negated atthe end of the films.
Filmmaking- A teamwork:
Filmmaking is teamwork. And itdepends on the audience. Even if the whole team is fully convinced on aproject, the success of the film cannot be guaranteed. It is made for a largeand larger reach, so being communal can’t help. Communal ideology may give asensational and controversial opening but it can’t deliver a hit film. Afterall it is a business first and any other thing afterwards. The fact is thebasic instinct of Indiaremains intact with the feel of Unity in Diversity. Those who understand thisminimal need of filmmaking, never fail in this area and show a great solidarity-no matter they are making a formulae film or a thought provoking or somethingdifferent. So a secularist approach is always a successful and novel way topresent things to a larger audience and greater acceptability and our filmmakersknow this very well.
Not only filmmakers, but alsoall the technicians, actors and background workers perfectly know that evenslightest communal thinking or feeling can affect their product and if the endproduct is not up to the mark, their career is at stake. There is no movingahead with such type of ideology in this field. Filmmaking is very insecure andvolatile sector. Everyone is uncertain of the success of their product. Fate ofyears of hard work is decided on a Friday. It’s not only the product orsuccess. A big number of people survive on this field. If they are part of agood team, their work will continuously grow and all the members will be benefited.No one alone can boast about one's success, but it is the result of combinedteam efforts. There is no differentiation in cast, class, region or language inthis field. All are welcome. Only the person, who has potential, will survive.This is the true spirit of the industry. And not to mention, this spirit istruly a secular spirit, which is a driving force in the film industry.
Secular spirit- A driving force:
Most of the stories having anyshades of communal biases are used for setting the plots. Religious,fundamental, and political thoughts and events are shown in the films inexaggeration, but only to exemplify the events of the plot and story. Endresult of these types of stories is always shown and finished on a secularnode, in the interest of common person.
More than Hindi films, filmysongs have helped develop a better secular world. And most of the lyricists ofindependent Indiahave followed true Indian culture and its spirit. Sahir Ludhianavi, thegreatest lyricist of films, decided not to go to Pakistanat the time of partition, and remain in India. He was a genuinely a secularperson. All time favourite bhajan written by Sahir- ‘Allah tero naam, Ishwartero naam’- is still sung with great love and honour. Another famous song of"Dhool ka Phool" (Film by B.R.Chopra, 1960)- "Tu Hindu banegana Mussalman banega, insaan ke aulad tu insaan banega"- was a big hit.Even the audience cheered on the song and the film also succeeded on boxoffice. Since then, most of the secular lyrics have been written by SahirLudhianvi or Shakeel Badayuni, music given by Naushad Ali and sung by MohammadRafi. Muslim heros sung these bhajans or songs in Hindu Temples. Hindu Muslimbhai-bhai formulae were common and they worked together. Muslim heroes took‘prasaad’ from Hindu ladies and Hindu heros celebrated Muslim festivals aswell. So are the rituals. Rakhi is tied by the Hindu girls on the wrists ofMuslim heroes. Fighting for the sake of country in armed forces, police forcesand other places have been a rich idea to portray Hindu Muslim bhai-bhaiformulae on the celluloid. In many films, we can see a Hindu friend sacrificingand saving a Muslim friend and vice versa. This is not by chance, but by selection.Chetan Anand's Haqueeqat, J P Dutta’s Border and John Matthew’s Sarfarosh aresome of the examples. Most of the filmmakers did not name their villains withtheir proper or family names. They have not been any Khan, Peter, or Chauhan.Instead, they are better known as Mogambo, Shakaal, Tiger, Thakur etc. This isthe symbol that filmmakers don't want to name any evil person in the name ofany particular cast or religion or region.
Some of the important Hindifilms, which depict true secular image of Bollywood may be named as- Zakhm(1998) by Mahesh Bhatt, 'Bombay'(1995) by Mani Ratnam, Sarfarosh by John Mathew Mathan, Rang De Basanti byRakesh Mehra, Water by Deepa Mehta, Parjania by Homi Adjania, Dhokha by PoojaBhatt and Rice Plate (of Das Kahaniyan) by Rohit Roy. These films have shown aclearer image of the Muslims in Indiaand also their true Indian spirit of pluralism. Now it is clearly shown thatIndian Muslims are responsible citizens of the country and feel threatened ifsomeone attacks or criticizes our identity. It seems like saint Kabir has beena driving force behind the names of truly secular characters in the films. Thistrend can be seen in Mani Ratnam's Bombay,and Shimit Amin's Chak De India. Sarfarosh has given a detailed dialogue on thestatus of Inspector Salim, whose sincerity was being questioned since he is aMuslim. The character of Salim played by Mukesh Rishi was very meaningful andreal. Amir Khan playing the role of ACP Rathore did a close discussion withInspector Salim. This scene was very much liked by the audience, as this is theoriginal feel of Indian Muslims. Muslim protagonists played in Chak De Indiaand Dhokha are more Indian than Muslim and show that they are taking theirresponsibilities as routine, where there is no room for communal biases. Zakhmhas played a vital role on this theme. In a scene, the character played by AjayDevgan slaps his brother who, unaware of his mother’s religion, her faith, isabout to go and kill a Muslim boy who had burnt his mother alive. Ajay Devganstrikes him and says, "Yeh tere baap ka mulk hai kya?" (Is this yourfather’s land?) And says, "Kisko nikalega? Inko nikalega, kyon? Kyon ke yeMusalman hai?" This film has proved very promising and people liked itvery much. Not because it showed a conflict between two religions, but itslated true Indian sentiments beautifully and provided a stage for discourse.
Negative Trends- A Passing Phase:
But, things have never been black and white. Everything is not sorosy or beautiful as it looks in this industry. The other side of the coin is,therefore, very important too. Not much, but there are several occasions of communalbiases depicted in Hindi films. Famous filmmakers have slated films, which havemarked communal footprints in Bollywood. Veteran scriptwriter and poet JavedAkhtar says- “I haven’t seen a Muslim character play Holi in any film, althoughmillions of them do so in real life.” Further, while a goon can hide goldbehind a Hindu deity, one can’t show a similar situation in a mosque, asfilmmakers are afraid of hurting the sentiments of a minority. Deepa Mehta wasnot allowed to shoot her film Water in Varanasieven for one day, and harassed for making films that targeted aspects of theHindu religion rather than looking into other religions such as Christianity orIslam. Why were her films saturated with this content? The answer is simple:she is Hindu; she is an Indian woman. She understands the Hindu culture morethan any other, Islam or Christianity.
Josh, Phir Bhi Dil Hai Hindustani, Fiza, Gadar, Hero, Jo Bole SoNihal, Mission Kashmir, Jaal are some films, which can't be certified assecular films. But at the same time, except one or two among these films, allare an utter failure. Some of them highlighted a false agenda, which is nottrue in Indian context. They show the hidden agenda of ISI (Inter-ServicesIntelligence) the secret service agency of Pakistan in these films. Storyline of these films depict a dormantanti-India message. It looks like these filmmakers did not understand thedifference between injustice and anti-national. The film Josh depicts HrtihikRoshan as an innocent person who to fight injustice joins the ranks of theterrorists against the Indian nation. In Phir Bhi Dil Hai Hindustani, police isframing up an innocent person (Prabodh Rawal) as an enemy (Pakistani) agent. Thisimplicates that Indian Police identifies innocent people as terrorists. Thiscan’t be justified in any case. Even a common person understands thisphenomenon and differentiates between an innocent and a terrorist. It issurprising that these filmmakers do not understand this simple thing. Can we saythat people who kidnapped Rubaiya Sayeed were innocents? This was the start ofterrorism in Jammu and Kashmir.Indian Military or Police is deployed there to fight with the terrorists andanti-national elements. If films cited above show the innocents becomingterrorists due to atrocities of the armed forces, this is totally ridiculous. SimilarlyJosh is setup with a Hindu-Christian angle in two gangs fighting for theirexistence. This is a remake of "Westwide Story", and changed enoughto the backdrop of Goa and a Hindu-Christianangle. This is not a true Indian story,as Goa is a place of solidarity more than any place in India, and aplural society exists in original sense. One can find followers of Hindu,Christian and Muslim religion in a single family. Who did give freedom to these filmmakers toportray such a superficial story, which does not exist in our society at all?
In the same way some films likeJo Bole So Nihal, Hero and Gadar have also used this formula of instigating thesentiments of common people on the basis of communal ideology. Gadar was a simple film but it was set inthe backdrop of partition of Indiaand Pakistan,with a romantic story of a Sikh man and a Muslim woman. Sunny Deol infiltrates in Pakistani territoryand fights with a war with almost an impossible arsenal of his father in lawand Pakistani Military to get his wife back with him. What is more important is the dialoguebetween Sunny Deol and Amrish Puri. A lot of venum is spitted against eachother on the name of Hindu and Muslim. Another Sunny Deol starrer film Hero isusing a Hindu religious hymn- "Om Jai Jagdish..." whenever hero killsany terrorist. The main aim of these films was to fight against Muslimterrorists, or Pakistani peoples, but the hidden focus behind them looks likethey are fighting against Indian Muslims. No doubts that these tricks are notwelcomed and anti Muslim dialogues in these films are not praised by theaudience. Hero, Qayamat, Jaal flopped badly.
Power packed performance by Sunny Deol could not show the doors ofsuccess to a successful formulae film- Jo Bole So Nihal. It was a big budgetSikh starrer film, who is a pro-Jat community. The Sikhs did not like the ideaand film was immediately off the theatres from Punjaband other parts of country. A bomb wasexploded in a Delhi theatre, where this film was screening, to draw theattention and protest against this film, which have a slogan- ‘No if, no but,only Jutt’..
Accordingto producer-director Mahesh Bhatt, films reflect current trends and Muslimbaiting is a part of it. This is only a passing trend, and did not reflect thegeneral thinking in the industry.
It seems Hindi cinema has not done due justice to the minorities.Apart from Muslims, Christians and Sikhs are also a deprived lot. Initially,Christian characters were show in smaller roles. Christian women were shownlike barmaids, keeps of the gangsters or bearing not so well image. Christianman was not given big roles of hero; he was a drunkard man, who had a goodheart. Same is with Sikhs. Whenever hero is in crisis, a Sikh will appearsmiling from any corner as a taxi or truck driver and help hero to come out ofcrisis. Hero of Hindi cinema many times changes his looks as Sikhs to changehis identity for some times in some tricky situations. But we have notwitnessed a Sikh being a protagonist in a leading Hindi movie, except Jo BoleSo Nihal in 2005, but this was not welcomed due to Pro Jat community.
Hindi Cinema- Its Reach:
Our debate will not end without Anand Patwardhan and Rakesh Sharma.Little different from fiction, these are ace documentary filmmakers of India, who havetaken Indian pride to the remote corners of the world. Their films have woncritical acclaims in international film festivals and national awards andFilmfare awards. Final Solution by Rakesh Sharma is a film on 2002 Gujrat riotsand after effects. It won many international awards. But due to the realityshown in this film, censor board did not pass this film without cuts. And it isnot previewed to Indian audience. Same is with the films by Anand Patwardhan.Latest of his brilliant works is Jang aur Aman ("War andPeace", 2002). This movie explains the political and nuclear issues of India and othercountries. Patwardhan says- "My film is based on the Gandhian philosophyof non-violence. It exposes the political hypocrisies of India, Pakistanand the United Statesregarding the nuclear issue. They have a problem with the way I have putforward my argument. But [they] cannot point a finger at the factual data Ihave used in the film as it is true." As a result, this film is not openfor preview to Indian audience. Other famous films by Patwardhan are Prisonersof Conscience (1978), Bombay Our City (1985), In Memory of Friends (1990), Inthe Name of God [Hindi title: Ram Ke Naam] (1992), Father, Son, and Holy War[Hindi title: Pitra, Putra, aur Dharamyuddha] (1994) and Narmada Diary (1995).
Themajor flaw with these films are that they do not reach to a wider section ofpeople as feature films. No theatres are showing documentaries. And in case ofabsence of censor board certification, they cannot be shown to the people, forwhom they are being made. So the prime purpose of making these important films getsdefeated. They do get critical acclaims and praise worldwide but what is thebenefit to the common person if he/she is not able to view these nerve-breakingfilms. A soft and tricky approach to the problems may be the real solution, sothat their reach gets widened to the common people.
Finally,the reach of Hindi cinema is global. Bollywood is one of the largest filmmakingindustries of the world. Indonesia,USA, UK, Africa, Australia,Malaysia, Nigeria, Pakistan,Bangladesh, Sri Lanka aresome of the countries where Hindi films have a larger demand and supply. Thesecountries like Hindi films irrespective of cast, class, religion, language,region or race. So it becomes our responsibility to make such films, which arenot related to these issues. A truly global film should not have such narrowmindedness or communal tags. Our filmmakers should take utmost care to tacklethese issues and deal with such types of subjects carefully. I strongly recommendthat, as a governing body, Censor Board should deal with such issues withprofound sincerity, rather than to popularize issues like sex and violence.Such issues are also very important but films vomiting communal poison, whetherdirectly or indirectly should be dealt with strong measures. To preserve thetrue Indian culture in its diverse unity and solidarity this is the least wecan do. After all we cannot deny that pluralism is the soul of Indian societyand our films can't be away from this very fact at any cost, as they are the replica of our culture and civilization.
