We! Or Our Victimhood Defined

I watched the movie ‘Finding Fanny’ last week. Needless to say, I was appalled that a movie based on a group of Goan Christians did not have a single Goan or a Christian in it’s lead cast. Leave aside other characters; even the blink-and-you-miss role of the padre was played by a Hindu actor! What sort of discrimination does our film industry practice that it had to pad up a Gujarati married to a Punjabi to play the lead role? Is Goa so devoid of Christian women with large derrieres that it had to resort to such blatant racism?

Sadly, the story of Bolloywood’s (Indian film Industry, if you like) insensitivity does not end here. We had a Muslim playing the role of Flying Sikh, Milkha Singh, even though, in real life, Milkha’s parents had been mowed down by marauding Muslim mobs. In hardly any movie involving a tawaif, a real life tawaif has played the lead role. Leading actors have played the roles of alternately abled, i.e., lame, deaf, dumb, blind, deranged et al. Does India lack people with disabilities that actors had to be painted and dented to play such roles? We still laugh at Mehmood’s antics in Padosan. Surely, Bollywood had accomplished classical singers from the Southern parts of India, who could have played the role with panache?

But No! A Kamalahasan playing a dwarf in Appu Raja, a Nimal Pandey playing a cross dresser in Daayra or a Manisha Koirala playing a terrorist from the North Eastern India are simply symptomatic of the inherent prejudices of us, the ugly Indians. In an egalitarian India, we would not have the need of people ‘acting’ to assume some other persona. Only those who are representative of the character will get the just chance to play the said role. So, Shahrukh fans; eat your hearts out. The only movie where you should see Shahrukh next is where he plays a third generation émigré from the North-West Frontier Province!

Outrageous?

Madness? Xenophobia? Rant of some ignoramus who does not understand ‘art’?

Maybe! Or maybe not!

I am only articulating what the collective angst of all those who felt outraged at Priyanka Chopra playing Mary Kom, gets replicated on a larger scale.

In the last few weeks, words of outrage on the above ‘abomination’ have spewed forth in many publications, including longish columns in the ‘Open Mag’, the youngest pretender to the ‘liberal’ space of India. The root of anguish is the perceived discrimination against people from the North-Eastern States in mainland India. That the movie was shot in Manali rather than in Manipur was condemned. The snarling face of Priyanka, as she launched a punch, was declared to be an attempt to appear ‘chinki’. After all, does not snarling result in one squinting the eyes, baring the teeth and stretching of flesh over the cheekbones?

So, the fact that the movie ‘Mary Kom’ could not be shot at Manipur on account of a ban by terrorist groups to fight ‘Hindi colonialism’ is the fault of Hindi speaking people. That a commercial movie director decided to place his bets on a known star rather than risk money on an unknown face from the North East only a manifestation of his racial prejudices. And no, an actor should not play roles other than those defined by his ethnicity/gender/social strata as any attempt to do so is insulting to the collective psyche of those people who he chooses to enact.

Sadly, over the last few years, our shrill self-proclaimed ‘liberal’ brigade has succeeded quite a lot in dulling our powers of cognition. In the world getting created through this shrill discourse, there are only two categories – the oppressed and the oppressor. And; the identity of both these categories gets defined at birth. Hence, the murder of Nido Tania was a blatant case of racism simply because he belonged to the North east. And no, the fact that he vandalized the restaurant after getting teased on his hairstyle was immaterial in provoking the murderers. That Delhi is a city, where murders get committed for as paltry issues as giving way on road, a loan of INR 20 or a place in the queue for filling up water. But no; that 5 autos bypass a North Easterner without picking her up is racism and not the boorishness of the autowallah, which extends to even the most Punjabi like Punjabi of Delhi.

Very soon, we are likely to have another law which with ‘prohibit’ racism against the North Easterners. What exactly will it achieve? That autowallahs who do not pick them up will be locked up, or that people who tease them will be prosecuted?

What is certain is that a person accused of committing a crime against someone from the North East will be tried under 3 different sections of law for the same crime – one on the general provision, another on the SC/ST Act and lastly, on the new law. If it sounds ridiculous, it is, because it is.

Over the last few years, accelerated in the recent past, we now have a surfeit of laws, and more sadly, a social consciousness, that defines identity as the basis of victimhood.

Almost all woman-centric laws, including the recent changes to rape-related laws are draconian in the sense that the burden of proof of innocence shifts to the accused. While the overall intent might still be noble, such laws and others like the ‘promotion of communal violence bill’ ultimately cleave the society for they link the crime to identity. In such a discourse, a poor man cannot be a criminal for his crime will be seen to be dictated by his poverty. A riot will always have the Hindu as a rioter even if the killed and maimed are all Hindus.

Worse. Such social consensus will absolve the so-identified 'oppressed' from making any effort to play by the rules of any civil society. While a certain degree of discrimination against people from the North East might be real, can it in any way be said to be as serious as what the so-called mainland Indians experience in many North Eastern States? If being called Mayangs, being extorted, being put under targeted curfew, being deprived of numerous benefits and debarred from places/social gatherings/open celebrations is not racism, then what is? How many of those condemning racism in North India also realise that the reality is more complex? A one-sided condemnation will ultimately lead to tacit and then explicit validation of even the most serious types of discrimination which the 'discriminated' and the 'oppressed' practice. After all, what remains if the moral centre of a people remains moral no longer?

Muslims form a larger proportion of undertrials in the country as compared to their population? But are not more people from the community involved in crimes and terrorism related activities as compared to others? If proportion was to be a criterion, India will have to open up many more jails for women for inspite of being some 49% of the population, they do not comprise even 3% of the undertrials!

Much is made of the fact that North Indians call all people from TN, Kerala, AP and Karnataka as Madrasis? Is it ignorance or racism? A few days back, a youngster from Punjab, when getting to know that I am from Orissa, asked if Orissa is ‘in’ Andhra! Racism or ignorance? On my B-School campus, mates from Southern parts of the country, on seeing me eating rice would exclaim – do North Indians also eat rice? Racism or ignorance? Having stayed in Bangalore, Chennai and Kochi, have experienced enough incidents of auto/taxi drivers trying to charge higher fare, shopowners trying to cheat, co-passengers being nasty (alongwith of course a much larger number of very positive experiences). Do I call that racism, ignorance, indifference or a general human tendency?

Not many years ago, our founding fathers (even the anglophile Nehru) understood that the only way the disparate people of India would forge a common identity would be through celebration of the strings of unity which runs through our diverse communities. Today, we are regressing to a tribal culture where our birth defines the people we are, our rights, our grouses and even more ominously, whether we would be considered as an oppressor or not? A reprehensible caste system is getting created where those who are perpetually offended can commit murder and get away with it. Perhaps, it is because claiming victimhood is easy. Why should I make an effort to get out of my cesspool if I can blame my plight on the ‘other’ and be sympathized with and get helped much?

One ever lasting contribution which the ‘liberals’ have certainly made to the modern society is to provide a surfeit of labels. That you don’t want to label yourself is immaterial as probably that defiance will earn you some other label. Individual efforts count for little and the shackles imposed by these labels will prove stronger than what the erstwhile varnashram dharma could impose on you.

Drums all around! “Four legs good, two legs bad.” Or wait! Is it Two legs good, four legs bad!?