सोमवार, 21 मार्च 2011

TATA TIMES


TATA    TIMES


 




               We are the hollow men
               We are the stuffed men......

               Shape without form, shade without colour,
               Paralysed force, gesture without motion;

  ( from ‘Hollow men’ by T S Eliot )

Today the concerns of the Nation are several—rising food prices, widespread corruption, cash for ‘confidence vote’  in Parliament, violent posturing by Maoists, farmers in peril,  jpc probe . The majority of the people are preoccupied with some thoughts based on the above problems , challenges. But; our most respected industrial house thinks otherwise. These days the most prominent subject on its agenda is right to privacy. I am therefore  in predicament about Tatas harping on the right to privacy bill; an important bill in a democracy but certainly an insignificant one compared to the problems in hand. The cry of Tatas for matters of privacy is like  a scar on a face compared to the gravity of the current crisis which is like  a terminal disease. This perhaps is the difference between a capitalist’s and common man’s minds. And Tatas did make headway in their prime concern! As  recently  there was a news item in the Asian Age newspaper which stated that the approval to ‘Tap’ phones will now be accorded by the Secretary level officer in Enforcement Directorate and DRI  ( Directorate of Revenue Intelligence) . This change in policy was prompted by the complaint of Tatas regarding leak in the Nira Radia tapes, exposing the nexus among Industrialists- Lobbyists—Journalists –Politician etc in order to appoint favourable MP as  a  Minister of their choice to gain Telecom mileage.
          When we were young the corporate culture was restricted to metropolitan cities and was in its infancy, computer was remotely known and Business studies were limited. The only capitalists/industrialists we heard of and read in the newspapers was that of Tatas and  Birlas.   At that time it was perceived that Birlas were close to the Congress and that was why the primitive vehicle; the Ambassador was the official Indian car. Despite the ideals of Socialism prevailing in University Campus there was a certain respect for Tatas for the contributions in the field of Steel and Automobiles. The face of JRD was the only corporate face respected, it is learnt that Nehru liked him too but not his ideology on economic matters. It was widely believed that Tatas did not deal in bribes and the entire Empire was made on the strength of hard work, farsightedness and luck!
   The recent happenings exposing the most respectable faces of Indian public life have made me numb and compelled to reconsider my stand in public life. Is corruption an essential ingredient for progress ?  Is Gandhian Dictumof  pure means for noble ends’ all nonsense and the Machiavellian Dictum that ‘the end justifies the means’ is  all  pervasive? It is now common knowledge that Industrial houses have close links with the bureaucrats and  ministers and in fact they nurture them. Tatas have always been propagating that they never give bribes and we were pleased to know that one  could create wealth on the basis of honesty and fair-play. Indeed, with the revelations many young minds will be shaken.   
 Ironically only a few days prior to the exposure of Radia tapes Mr Ratan Tata had mentioned that he was asked to give a bribe of 15 crores to a Minister to  get cleared his Airline Operations proposal. However with the Radia tapes in public domain even Tatas have turned ordinary and have succumbed to the usual flaw.
 We now do not need any special investigation agency to establish that Nira Radia the Head of Vaishnavi communications was employed by Ratan Tata to seek favour from the Telecom Minister. If merit alone was the criterion then why a Lobbyist was employed ? Such favours are normally done  in exchange of monetary gains and therefore it can be concluded that Tatas have also given bribes indirectly to obtain favours. The times are uncertain for us and as  i file this article  the latest issue of ‘Outlook’ states that Tatas received favours from Shri Arun Shourie in the sale of VSNL which was sold for a ‘song’.
The fire in the ‘Bombay House’ the Headquarters of Tatas was  symbolic of the decling values of the once premium house or perhaps  the  ‘ethical – nemesis’ of the institution which too faltered and fumbled .
  
Jinhe naaz hai hind par wo kahan hain?

बुधवार, 16 मार्च 2011


FROM    ‘ DO BIGHA ZAMEEN’ IN 1954 TO   ‘DABANG’IN 2011
O  FILMFARE !   WHAT     A     FALL
       


In   1954  the first   filmfare  awards  were  announced  and  ‘Do Bigha Zameen’  was adjudged as the best film of the year. It  was  a  befitting tribute to the downtrodden people of rural India  who  are  forced by exploitation to  seek irregular employment in cities in order to save their land from the clutches of the Zamindars. The film produced and directed by Bimal Roy was a landmark film in Indian Cinema and was influenced by the neo-realism cinema of Italy particularly ‘The bicycle Thieves’ by De Sica.  It was in fact a precursor to Satyajit Ray’s ‘Pather Panchali’ which was released in 1955
Cinema with social purpose reflecting the problems of society was the theme of the times—‘Boot Polish’, ‘Do Ankhen Barah Haath’ etc.  As we move to 2011 we witness that   Dabang’ an ordinary masala film but hugely successful at cash  counters  winning  the  best  film  award  of  2010.The journey from 1954 to 2010 has witnessed many developments in the sphere of cinema particularly in the technical field and organisational matters .The planning and emphasis on time is of significance but certainly in terms of quality and story telling  there is a significant decline. The spirit of ‘romanticism’ has been lost to aggressive commercialism. Are we expected to be silent when we witness such degeneration? In times such as these when everything has a price and is suspected to be  on sale, from news to reviews to awards; what standards are expected to be maintained? I remember in the nineties when Shahrukh  Khan  won his first Filmfare award for ‘Baazigar’  he announced on stage whilst  accepting the trophy that he was so desperate to possesses the filmfare award that he had even brought money in his pocket in case the same was required. He may have said that in zest but the irony is that  the same  Khan had to muster all  his  ‘resources’  in order to grab the best actor award for ‘My Name is Khan’ even though Hritik Roshan performed much better in ‘Guzarish’, his performance was applauded by both critics as well as cinegoers. It is the reflection of the changed times.

The path of  rise  and decline of  Filmfare  could be ascertained from the path of our national ethos since independence. During the fifties and  sixties the ideals of freedom struggle prevailed and therefore meaningful yet entertaining films  were  made and awarded such as , ‘Boot Polish’, ‘Jagriti’,’ ‘Mother India’,‘Sujata’, ‘Bandini’, ’Sahib Bivi Aur Gulam. Though largely it was the spirit of that period , but credit must be given to Filmfare for awarding Bimal Roy 11 times from 1954 to 1964. Seven times for Best Director and four for best film. In the present times Bimal Roy would have been relegated to Critics’ Award category!  The actual decline came a little later but the first indications were observed in 1966 itself when Himalaya ki God Mein’ was adjudged the best film ignoring the only war epic ‘Haquiquat of Chetan Ananad which was a commercial success with superhit music.  The reason is inexplicable. The shocker came in 1967 when  ‘Guide’ was ignored in Best Music category and the award was bagged by Shankar Jaikishen for now much forgettable film ‘Sooraj’ ( Baharon phool barsao mera mehboob ayya hai) .Can any one condone Filmfare for such a criminal offence to the sensitivity of all music lovers ? But indeed Society is superior to Filmfare and it has showered such love and devotion to Sachinda that the scars of being ignored do not exist; but the character of Filmfare was revealed. Its growing  insensitiveness to Art and Culture was amply displayed in 1973 when Sohan Lal Kanwarwon the award in the best film and  best director category sidelining Kamal Amrohi for the Classic Paakeeza’. That year Beimaan a film starring Manoj Kumar( it is said that he ghost directed the film) bagged 7 awards; an ordinary film. How will Filmfare redeem itself of such sins!
  Coinciding with our National ethos by the end of sixties the spirit of fairness had given way to favouritism and the benefits of propaganda and publicity was gaining currency. In between out of sheer compulsion to maintain its facade of uprightness and its leadership of film journalism Satyajit Ray was awarded for ‘Shatranj Ke Khilari’ in 1979  and to Shekher Kapoor for ‘Bandit Queen’ in 1997 when both films were internationally acclaimed by then.
   Since last 15 years  the awards have lost their respect as it caters to certain powerful pressure groups and therefore such groups use the publicity and platform to propel into limelight  their  protégé/protegee . This phase it can be said has matched with the age of economic liberalization wherein numerous corporate houses and International  Studios have marched in and as capitalism has set its  eyes on rural land for converting to Sez so have these business people influenced the cinema’s economy and culture wherein each film is merely a  business proposition.
    The cover and complexion of the magazine has also changed. One can only gloss over the pages, there is not much to read. At one time the ‘Review’ of filmfare was revered by the filmmakers for its strictness and minute observations. It was looked forward by the readers. Now; ‘Times of India’ gives reviews which are so liberal that its  intention  seem unclear .As an audience we look forward in some measure for fairness .  The taste of the audience too  has changed as they applaud   the Annual Award Ceremony on TV and watch   the  various  dances and comic interludes  performed by stars on huge payment as the telecast earns  enormous  advertisement . This is the compensation for the loss of substance and aesthetics that withstood Filmfare during the initial years.