Myopic Censor Board: Banned, Banned, Banned!
Nitin Karani
Like Jesus Christ is said to have told Peter, 'Before the cock crow, thou shalt deny me thrice', the Indian Censor Board in Delhi has banned Sridhar Rangayan's film on drag queens thrice over.
While in April 2003 the censor board refused 'Gulabi Aaina' (The Pink Mirror) a certificate because it is "full of obscenity and vulgarity", recently in April 2006, the board has done a complete change of tack to keep the film in the closet! The revising committee and the second revising committee refused it a certificate because in their opinion "the film Gulabi Aaina deals with an extremely complex issue of alternate sexuality in a peripheral manner". Further, the board's order states, "The problems and isolation faced by transvestites has not been dealt with in a holistic manner. Thus the film is refused certification as per relevant provisions of Cinematograph Act 1952".
Sridhar is justifiably enraged and ready to join battle. He is planning to fight it out by taking the issue to the tribunal. (Also, see his comments below on the guidelines under which the committee reviewed the film and rejected it.) Fighting a battle for three years to get his film reviewed by the Board, Sridhar says he came across several skeletons in the censor board's cupboard: "From those who write censor scripts, but actually offer their services as touts to get the film passed by censors to filmmakers who add six scenes of violence so that the censors can cut three and pass it. I even found out from reliable sources that a recent, acclaimed gay film was passed by the Censor Board on payment of certain monies."
While Sridhar does praise the Board's chairperson Sharmila Tagore and the regional officer at Delhi who "at least gave the film a fair chance by putting it up for review", he is critical of the revising committee: "It was ridiculous sitting in front of six people and having to explain why I made the film and what I have tried to say in the film. If I could say it all verbally, then why did I have to use a visual medium like film!
"Peripheral and not holistic?! What do they expect me to say in 40 minutes, which is the length of my film. Moreover, 'Gulabi Aaina' is not a documentary. I wanted it to be an entertainer, but layered with subtext. When you do a film about gays, everyone expects a preachy message or a downright maudlin tearjerker. I wanted the audience to laugh with the characters instead of at them. Isn't that good enough reason to make the film and have it reach viewers? It's a different way of sensitizing."
The Board really takes the cake and the pudding for implying that Sridhar's film is insensitive to the problems faced by what it calls "transvestites". In fact, that requires a vast stretch of imagination considering that Sridhar has been one of the forbearer of the gay rights movement in Bombay, being deeply involved with 'Bombay Dost' and The Humsafar Trust. It's like calling Arjun Singh insensitive to the plight of OBC students (In Singh's case, we are not sure whether his sincerity is for the OBC cause or to his own political survival).
The feckless, hypocrites in the committee after all the 'tamasha' of interrogating Sridhar about the film didn't have the balls to pass the film. Says he, "They pretend they are broadminded, but when it comes to films with an alternate take, they cower. Basically, I have realized they wanted my characters to cry over their fate. They didn't take too kindly to the fact that I showed gays and drag queens happy with their lives and being unapologetic. They wanted a daily soap with buckets of tears!" If Ekta Kapoor was looking for 'chamchas', she would have found them there.
Meanwhile, Sridhar is looking for your support, especially if you are from the film fraternity and/or the gay community: "My fight is about freedom of expression as a filmmaker, and I damn well know how to use it sensitively and sensibly."
Thankfully, Sridhar's latest film 'Yours Emotionally!' has been produced by a UK based production house so no going through the sicko censors this time!
Crafty Censors
Instead of protecting the citizens, more often the State uses the law to terrorize them and curb their rights. Our censorship guidelines have also been similarly twisted to restrict free speech and discussion of homosexuality.
While an in-depth look at the guidelines is needed, Sridhar gave his responses to some of the guidelines under which the committee reviewed 'Gulabi Aaina' and rejected it:
- The medium of film remains responsible and sensitive to the values and standards of society.
"Nowhere is it mentioned what are these great values and standards of the society that they talk about. It is all a thick cloud in the air that the moral policemen comfortably hide under."
- Artistic expression and creative freedom are not unduly curbed.
"But that's exactly what they are doing by banning my film. It's utterly ridiculous!"
- Certification is responsive to social change.
"If they keep refusing certificate to films that are away from the mainstream and attempt to discuss alternate issues, how do they expect any social change to happen? All they want is to maintain a status quo so that none of them will be blamed for taking an issue forward. It's the who-wants-to-bell-the-cat syndrome."
- The medium of film provides clean and healthy entertainment.
"Just look at all the masala films and skin flicks that get the Censor's nod. Calling it clean and healthy entertainment is a big joke. Take a reality check folks!"
- As far as possible, the film is of aesthetic value and cinematically of good standard.
"My film has been screened at 57 international film festivals and won Jury Awards for Best Film of the Festival in New York and France. Most of the reviews talk about the sensitive handling of the subject and it has been rated as 'fabulous', 'compelling', 'unique' and even 'an excellent example of Indian cinema' by a Spanish critic. An art historian at Ohio State University compared it to Shyam Benegal's 'Mandi', saying it bridged the gap between 'Fire' and 'Bombay Boys' by "adding that breath of reality". How much more aesthetic and cinematic value can I pump into the film to please the censors? Maybe I should include 5 grisly murders, 3 item numbers and a bevy of half-naked women!"
Myopic Censor Board: Banned, Banned, Banned!
RSS:
- Subscribe to RSS 2.0 feeds for:
- » Comments on this article
- » Media
- » Culture: Desi
- » Culture: Social Issues
- » Media: Films - Bollywood
- » Desicritics.org articles by Nitin Karani
- » All Opinion articles
- » All Desicritics.org articles













temporal
URL
May 20, 2006
12:08 PM
Nitin:
It was ridiculous sitting in front of six people and having to explain why I made the film and what I have tried to say in the film. If I could say it all verbally, then why did I have to use a visual medium like film!
indeed!
Meera Kaura
URL
May 21, 2006
03:18 AM
Nitin, it is good you picked this issue. The Censor board comprises of majority (heterosexuals) and why would they be really concerned with minority (transsexuals, transvestites, gays, lesbians, eunuchs). For example, see my articles which reflect man-woman dichotomy are flooded with comments crossing 200+, of which more than half are just baseless and useless arguments, but my article on which you commented (remember the third sex speak), there were only few concerned readers. These are the ones who really understand that a human being is not restricted to what gender he/she is born to. There is much more to it. I wish censor Board had some good human beings in there to pass Sridhar's film which would have been a ver progressive step.
But, it is just that 'majority' is in power. But, if you want I can join this struggle and that too happily because I know what is it behind the curtain in the lives of transvestites and how much they have to go through.
Keep it up!
Rebel
May 22, 2006
02:14 AM
What social change do you intend to bring about? Have you dared to elaborate on this? Or perhaps, you don't have words to express your affection for alternate sexuality in human beings.
Remember, a film can't bring a social change dramatically. Most films are made 'from' the social change that are lurking inside people's closet and are not willing to reveal themselves. So, what social change in the society that you believe should come out in the open? And if you believe alternate sexuality should come out in the open, then I guess you are doing so in the wrong place...this is India, India can't even handle its own normal human needs, how can it handle these people? No, I am not against these other kind of people. I am saying that if you argue that you are trying to bring a social change, then what is that social change? What is it that you want to convey? And if you think that you only want to reveal something that has long been kept a secret, then in that case there are thousand other stuff that has never come out in the open. And one of them is Incest. You can never ever come out with the survey on incest, because its extremely personal and secret. Mind you, incest, I meant the victims are both, boys and girls. Much to the surprise of these feminists out here, boys too are victimized in a incest situation by women. And I have personally spoken to these young boys. Do you have the guts to reveal this or make a film on incest? I bet not only your production, you too will be under attack by women's group. Meera is supporting your cause only because encouraging alternate sexuality especially in men, will indirectly and strategically give an edge in their women empowerment program. You won't understand this deception of theirs.
Mrs Desai
May 22, 2006
02:33 AM
"Remember, a film can't bring a social change dramatically"
So why are you all getting 'provoked'???
Oh I forgot it is your chance to fame. Which 'man' will not want to share a tiny miny lime light with Aishwarya Rai-the famous 'woman'.
Rebel
May 22, 2006
02:58 AM
No wonder, why people don't trust you Mrs Desai. Last night you said you will not talk to me any more.
Righta
URL
May 22, 2006
03:27 AM
But I wonder why Ash doesn't learn acting even after this many films!, is she really dumb like I thought.
Rebel
May 22, 2006
03:32 AM
Fame has got inside her head and her neuronerves are beginning to shake violently. Lets see how much she lasts. The faster one goes up, the faster one drops down. She won't last long.
Victim
URL
May 22, 2006
03:37 AM
Yes we will see Ash down. Wait to read about us in the next few days in the newspapers. all those people who support this will shaken violently.
Rebel-thanks but no thanks. we victims can fight our own battles.
Sridhar
URL
May 22, 2006
06:45 AM
Thanks Meera for your support.
As for someone else in this forum asking about what social change can a film bring about, a film can surely lead to a discussion about issues that are never ever talked about. A healthy debate is definitely progression towards change. A stagnant view would be to say that no change is possible so lets not even discuss it. That's exactly the way the censor board reacts to films with alternate themes. Sridhar
Rebel
May 22, 2006
09:20 AM
Sridhar,
What is the intentions behind bringing out a social change, any social change? What do you think, why is there a sudden ferocious upsurge in women-centric serials on television? This is India, the most diverse and self-conflicting social country of all in the world. Here you will find people wanting to reduce crime by making films on crime and people wanting to increase crime by making films on crime. Like I said, I am not against the other kinds of people you are mentioning here, I am not even against the discussion or a progressive development of dialogues on certain important issues, I am against the painful inability of many such film-makers to articulate their intentions.
Have you thought of making a film on how a man lives in India, highlighting their suffering, which people think, "so what he suffers, thats what he is suppose to do"? Everybody are babbling about women, women and women and their so-called suffering, god knows what suffering. Have you thought of it before why are people insensitive towards a man and not with a woman? Why? Is a man not human? You are a man, do you think a man's life easier than a woman? The sham called women empowerment is only making our society, woman vs man, and everything is done to subdue and emasculate male gender. The indiscriminate importance and power given to women in the media world is only going to backfire pretty soon. Do you agree?
You are supporting the idea of giving respect to those other kinds of people in the society. I am supporting the idea of giving respect, a little respect to the male gender. Be a little sensitive toward men, they too are humans, they too feel pain. Try to come up with a idea of making a film on a man's life, the reality of his suffering, and then you see how your film gets rejected because "you are living in a woman's world". You can't even think of making a film where the cause of a man's suffering is a woman. However, in the above case, women will support you because it gives them an edge in their women empowerment campaign, the mother of all societal deception. I don't mean to boast but I am gifted to understand a woman's mind....and I appreciate your efforts and hope you succeed in whatever you are trying to do. Nothing personal.
Add your comment