The aftermath



The most frustrating debate that’s deafening our ears these days is this: To call them terrorists or not? Are they terrorists or mere criminals? While I wince at the term ‘mere’, I struggle hard to identify and understand why such a noise is being made in the first place.

If you are wondering what I’m blabbering about, let me clear the air. I’m so frustrated that I can’t start a blog piece in an appropriate format. Well, I’m referring to the aftermath of the failed Glasgow and London car bomb attempts.

While I fret and fume, I understand their dilemma. By ‘their’, I mean the politicians, the media and the secular intelligentsia. So far they had a standard, templatised framework for a terrorist. He is usually in his early 20s, beard sporting, often turban wielding, and is Madarassa trained ‘illiterate.’ He is trained to drive cars or fly planes into buildings or plant bombs in public places such as train stations, markets, embassies and temples. They don’t represent Islam. Islam preaches brotherhood; moderate and educated Muslims never endorse their Jehad.

Suddenly these intellectuals and politicos are at crossroads. An engineer and a PhD research student attempted to drive a bomb-laden Jeep into an airport and a trained and practicing doctor knew of their plans and allegedly even helped them. Overnight, Jehad turned very urbane and sophisticated.

Here is where the confusion came up. Do educated Muslims support these militants? Is Islam a reason for militancy and terror? Regardless or their class, qualification and social awareness, does being Muslim means being a terrorist?

These are difficult questions. I know that the above questions will be quite adverse on Muslims. Just because Prabakaran is a Tamil, doesn’t mean I’m a terrorist. I despise him and the regular visitors to this blog know how much. I also know that these questions can’t have a strong “No” as an answer.

My question, however, is this: Why is the world of Islam quiet about these events? Why do Indian Muslims quick to relegate this event as an exception and conclude in a hurry that ‘Indian Muslims are different.’ What evidence do I have to believe that they are? I look at Pakistan and Bangladesh. They ‘were’ Indian Muslims once. Today they live in utter chaos. These countries are returning to fundamentalism and their economy is in a shambles. In India too, we see the traces of such fundamentalism. Shah Bano is a classic example and the ferocity with which the Indian Muslims wanted ‘Satanic Verses’ banned still shudders me. I want to hear the voices of the so-called ‘moderate’ Muslim who would vehemently oppose Shah Bano incident, espouse free speech and advocate liberal religious practice. And well, shun these terrorists and acknowledge that they are indeed staining the face of Islam.

I want to believe that the concepts of Dar al-Islam and Dar al-Harb are archaic and kafirs are passé. The events happening around the world are not strengthening my beliefs. I want the moderate Muslims to assure me and the rest of the world that people are safe here and Islam is indeed here to spread the message of brotherhood.

Sivaji - The Boss

You should not ask any questions about Sivaji. If you are wondering how Rajini manages to live through a huge shock or how he manages to issue those threats to the villain, who has immeasurable political clout, you would be wrong. On the best case, it is like wondering how Spidey manages to extract such a long and strong rope out of his wrist. Or how superman carried that Boeing 737 from up in the skies safely onto a baseball ground.

In the worst scenario, it would be considered blasphemy and you would be pelted with stones.

For the believer, watching Sivaji is like watching a religious ritual for his God. And for the unbeliever, it is a mish mash of noise, pointless action filled with demagoguery. Even if you are not a Rajini fan, it helps to put on the mask of the faithful before you enter the temple, err, the cinema hall. And once your temporary baptism is completed, you are in for a major roller-coaster ride of fun, joy, wonderment and fulfillment.

At 58, the mesmerism of the God hasn’t waned and, well, it only seems to get stronger and better. Rajini seems to have the uncanny knack of authoritatively showcasing his humility only to enhance his aura around him and make the fans gasp. He is the only one working in the movie and rest is mere props. It’s true that Sivaji comes with the best of the talent in the industry. You have Prabhu Deva choreographing the dance, Rahman writing the music, K V Anand holding the camera and none other than Shankar wielding the megaphone. This notwithstanding the other peripheral departments such as costumes and lyrics being managed by the bests in their own fields. But they all should understand that they have to do the best in order to be ‘faintly’ noticed in the presence of the king. After all, you are not going for the movie because they are doing their best jobs because, a quick question: Which is K V Anand’s previous movie? Well, you’ve lost it.

Never mind. Shankar still scores in the middle of the cacophony. Don’t expect me to tell you the story because even though it’s only incidental, it still holds good and is interesting. And never mind again if you find the humor silly and slapstick, or if you find the gravity-defying actions noisy and crazy. You aren’t watching a Shyam Benegal or Mark Forster. It’s that season again and all that noise and jamboree are for the festival for the king, or should I say God?

On a serious note, if you haven’t seen it already, don’t expect a Baasha. That would have to remain the finest Rajini film ever. Go expecting a roller-coaster ride of action and comedy and the king of South Indian entertainment at his best. I don’t think Rajini has worked so hard for any other movie before. Whatever it is worth, go and watch it.

And be immersed in the festivities.