Padma Who?

I have never heard of the name Yasmin Merchant and had he been conferred with a Padma Shri, I would be wondering whether he deserved it. But he hadn't and he is apparently very disappointed to have missed it. So upset was he that he has written a heart-breaking letter to Rahul Gandhi questioning the methods and modalities of these Padma awards.

And then we learn that he is a Billiards champion and had won a gold medal in Asian Games; and several other championships alongside. So you know that he indeed deserves some or other form of this Padma title. He has missed the boat this time. Since he has written to the highest power centre in India, we'll hope that he gets it next time because from the letter it seemed that he is desperately longing for one.

Now, what else are the criteria for winning such an award apart from writing a letter to the Congress General Secretary? We don’t know. What are the criteria for winning a National Award? We don’t know that either. Like many things in India, These committees too function like a secret agency. We don’t know who the juries are for National Awards, or members of the Padma Awards committee are. Every year they announce the names that take their fancy. As Merchant has lamented, some get it when they are in their death bed and some get it simply for being famous regardless of the extent of their achievements. So we are left wondering what Saif Ali Khan has achieved except dating the most eligible bachelorette in the industry. This is déjà vu for us. Last year we wondered what Akshay Kumar has achieved except letting his wife unzip his jeans in a public show. Why Yasmin Merchant was so desperate to get into this glorious list is simply unfathomable.





Apart from choosing the list of awardees, this secret committee also has a responsibility of balancing the sheet by ensuring that when B gets a title, A also does because otherwise it would upset the social balance. So when AR Rahman is awarded Padma Bhushan, it becomes important that Ilaiyaraja also gets it because they both are considered in tandem by, well I don’t know by who but that’s how it is always looked at. The fact that Ilayaraja holds the record in composition that will remain unbeaten for as long as the Earth rotates the Sun has not made this committee to choose him for the award. The fact that till 1992, Ilaiyaraja remained the most talented composer in India has not entitled him that. The fact that he was a magical genius in music has not entitled him. Rahman getting this title has suddenly made Ilaiyaraja eligible for the same. No doubt that Rahman deserves every bit of the title. He has taken the Indian music to an altogether different league and the fact that today the Indian popular music is known in the West through Rahman is no mean feat. But putting them together is like awarding V S Naipaul for literature simply because Arundhati Roy was being given one. We don’t lose much. We are only balancing the chart. But awards are not about checks and balances; they are about achievements and emotions.

And to rub salt to the wounds, people who have pending criminal cases get comfortably into the list. So what else? We only have to award Padma Shri to Madhu Koda and Shibu Soren to complete the cycle. Well, Alagiri deserves one too.

Despite all this happening, it is immensely surprising that the media has not made any noise about the reckless behaviour of the present government. They write targeting an abstract entity for this fiasco. Not just Padma awards which is purely emotional but this government is squarely to blame for some real problems like Telengana, naxalites, displacement of tribal and Dalit communities and above all else, rampant corruption which is no longer a concern of our society. The media just doesn’t recognise many of these as our problems. They don’t even question why a grievance on a central government award should be conveyed to a political party leader rather than the home minister or prime minister. Actually the reality is that they don’t care. To them, this is just another interesting controversy, something that merits as much curiosity as a celebrity gossip. Tribal displacement doesn’t excite the society as much as Saif Ali Khan defending his Padma title. Especially when his doting girlfriend is standing next to him in support, it gets a few additional minutes of airtime. Perhaps next year she might get a title for herself.

A Novel, A Film

’ Never judge a book by its movie’ – JW Eagen

'Have you read the book? if not, then shut up!' thundered Vinod Chopra. Nobody knew whether it was sheer impatience or the arrogance of having netted hundreds of crores out of 3 Idiots but it was the wrong move. The media and the public immediately rallied behind Chetan Bhagat who gleefully commented in his blog that after this incident, the world will understand who is at wrong and who is right.

Unfortunately, the rage after the episode fizzled out after Chopra apologised immediately and within no time, Hirani released an explanation in You Tube. All speculations were put to rest and eventually it was Chetan Bhagat who had to apologise with a stinking egg on his face.

I couldn't decide whose side to take as I had not read the book or seen the film so I was scared of Chopra screaming Shut Up at my ears. I've read the book and seen the film now so I can safely write about it without fearing anyone.



My biggest hope on 3 Idiots was about the Hindi film industry adapting a book into a film. The practice of making novels into films was virtually non-existent in Hindi industry. The only example that comes to our mind was Devdas. Even in other important regional industries such as Tamil and Telugu there are sporadic attempts but nothing significant to note, except perhaps Sujatha in Tamil whose superstar status allowed him to work comfortably with directors.

This absence of such practice has immensely affected our industry. Filmmakers are not good story writers usually and the converse is also true. J K Rowling couldn't have earned five rupees by choosing a film making career, which is an altogether different skill than writing. Even the best talents such as Steven Spielberg and Clint Eastwood mostly adapted novels or short stories into films. There are spectacular exceptions to this rule (Michael Crichton, Guilermo Del Toro) but this is generally the case. That's why our directors end up making run of the mill products, and even our best directors couldn't avoid producing redundant films or turning to Hollywood for story ideas, and resorting to plagiarism.

The only solution was to adapt Indian novels. India has great novels and amazing writers to its credit. Indian novels are being made into acclaimed Hollywood productions (Slumdog Millionarie, The Namesake). If this practice takes root here and if the mainstream filmmakers begin making novels into films and succeed then we can expect much better films and hope for an end to plagiarism. Consciously or unconsciously 3 Idiots carried this heavy burden of hope and it was almost delivering, until Chetan Bhagat decided to take the wind out of the sail.

Clearly, he had gone and lied miserably in his blog about the contract, script, credit, and the adaptation. The film suitably credits him as promised in the contract. There is no credit title called 'Story' as Bhagat complained. 'When the award for story is given who will collect them' asked Bhagat. Hopefully somebody would have told him by now that there is no such award and if he aspires for one he should aim to write a better book and hope for a Booker.

The book is quite mediocre. Other than occasional chuckle, it doesn't evoke anything and often you are laughing 'at the book' rather than 'with the book.' The script adaptation is brilliant, and if I were Bhagat, I would wonder how in the hell Joshi and Hirani managed to extract such an amazing script out of this shabby piece of text. Not grumble that 'my story has been stolen'.

As of now, all the parties concerned seemed to have apologised at some point or other. Nobody wanted to topple the gravy train and apparentlly what price did Bhagat get to sell his apology will remain an unknown mystery. However, the flip side to this controversy is we can't quickly start to dream of an adaptation series to start. Fearing similar controversies, filmmakers will think twice before buying rights to not just Bhagat's next work but even from other authors. That's another nasty contribution from this greedy writer. His gain was our loss.

Initially, the reports that Aamir Khan had not read the book kind of disturbed me and him commenting that Hirani requested him not to read it wasn't quite convincing. Finally reading the book opened my eyes. If Aamir Khan had read the book, he would probably have refused to sign up. Even if he had, chances are that he would have botched up his role as Roncho. I didn't gain anything either except overcoming my fear of Vinod Chopra to write this piece.

It's not just the beginning of the New Year but also the beginning of a decade. That's what the media will have us believe. We believe a lot of things the media says so this needn't be an exception. Nevertheless, what could be more phenomenal about a new decade, what is not about a new year or a new month, we don't know except that it gives opportunity for 'status report' crazy western media to take stock of 'the decade that was' and 'best of the noughties' as in best albums, movies, books, and also worst. And our Indian media follows suit by drawing up their own lists. East or West, we all love Top 10s so we lap it all up.



Where has the end of this decade brought us to? In India, everything became entertainment-driven, including media and politics. 24/7 news channels play a 'suitable' background music to pep up the news presentation. Driven by these channels, politicians prop up their best performances for the public. Like a movie is determined within two days of its release, any issue is drummed up for two full days and then is forgotten. This was a decade when 'pseudo-secularism' turned a coveted title rather than an insult.

The GDP of India grew like our population in the last decade but the rate of poverty was equally competitive. Politicians stopped being embarrassed about corruption and even a lip service paid to 'clean polity' stopped, which was good because the public themselves are corrupt and politicians talking about integrity seemed like ETs among their fellow Indians.



The public learnt to set buses on fire and show their might for issues like separate states, and dilapidated buildings, however, not for corruption in the scope of sixty thousand crores or exploitation of Dalits or displacement of tribal community for mineral wealth. An Indian youth who is not into IT became a secondary citizen and began to be treated like a tribal. The chasm between urban and rural life became so yawning and so wide that no bridge was thought possible or even necessary. For consolation, rural life and problems were made into movies and the urban population watched it eagerly as if it was an Iranian or El Salvador film, like eating an exotic dish.



For the first time in the history we have two prime ministers, one who takes credit for good things and the other who bears the brunt of the bad ones. We have a chief minister who loves erecting her own statues and another who loves felicitation parties and revels in self-anointed titles and awards. We also had a central minister who changed to best clothing to appear before media minutes after a terror attack and another who turned a fugitive and went absconding whilst holding the cabinet. And he is swearing in as a chief minister of a mineral-wealth state as we speak.



This was the decade where the prices of everything shot up through the roof, including the bribe paid for votes. Latest report: Rs. 1000/- per vote + one month cable TV subscription + one month milk subscription + one Biryani + one bottle of local liquor if you will: you go do the math.

Welcome to the New Decade. Happy New Year.

Who is the most threatening terrorist?

What can the world, especially India and the US learn from Abdulmutallab's attempted bombing of an American flight on Christmas day? The media are speculating whom to blame, how to approach this issue, and the pseudo-seculars must already be planning their defences.

Take an example what Time magazine has to say about lessons to be learned: '...There are four different U.S. terrorism databases, and yet Abdulmutallab's name never rose above the least threatening one.'

The CIA apparently has about four different levels of databases where the bottom-most imply the least threatening. So Abdulmutallab's remained there.

What should've happened? If the CIA had taken custody of Adbulmutallab and investigated him then the whole media would have cried hoarse about victimisation, human rights groups would have been up in arms and well, yet another Hindi film would have been made about racial profiling of 'innocent Muslims' in New York. (with some colourful songs of course)

Nobody, just nobody, no media house, none of the 24/7 channels, and no film maker and none of the pseudo-secularists ask this question: Why does the Muslim community, especially the Muslim leaders across the world go quiet over terrorism committed in the name of their god? Why, on the other hand, the community turns most vociferous, most vocal and shows envious unity over a wrong cartoon or an obscure documentary, chooses not to bother about it? WHY?

The Independent had an article where a laments that Islamic societies in the UK universities gather and spread radical ideas to their member students. He quotes a recent incident where a preacher was brought to an Islamic society of a London university advocated murdering homosexuals. A reverent doing so would have made front-page news in the UK. Why should we tolerate such atrocities not permitted for Hindu or Christian groups?

How are we going to make a terror suspect travel from the least-threatening database to the most-threatening one? What are the acceptable parameters? What are the human rights limitations to that? And who decides what those limits are?

More and more such incidents go to prove that Islamic terrorism is a global problem for all the secular, (read secular not pseudo-secular) democratic and non-Islamic countries. It has to be addressed seriously and aggressively.

When it comes to Islamic terrorism, there are no least-threatening databases.