Desicritics Category: Culture: Celebrities

Unleash The Paparazzi Hounds

Priyank Chandra — Tue, 16 Mar 2010 07:15:58 EDT

I would like to have more active paparazzi in India. I want them to hound and stalk the celebrities. Capture them in their most human state, and make them fight to retain their status of being role-models.

Their opinions do not matter, and count only as any of us, ignorant fools. Yet they blog, they tweet and the newspapers capture every statement they give. These are the models, the item-girls, the actors and actresses. The perfect brushed-up groomed faces that speak to us from advertisements everyday. We live in a society where the intellectuals seem to be forgotten, only to be replaced by meaningless opinions of beautiful people who shouldn't really matter. And I am tired of watching debates getting hijacked by celebrities, who say the obvious things to an audience that has already becoming used to the dumbed down pop culture of the idiot box and tabloids, insulting to the intellectuals who have spent a lifetime working in the field.

If the media wants to give the beautiful the role of the public opinion creators, then I ask them to please unleash their paparazzi hounds which exist only to show the truth, not just the media-op moments of sculpted beauty.

I'm no sadist and I would like people to have a right to their privacy, but I also see the need for truth. You cannot go in one extreme, without a counterweight. If you show the glamorous page-3 parties and the actor's ghost-authored opinions about the Pakistan, war and the Budget, then please let us see their affairs and unglamorous lifestyles.

It is only fair. Journalistic integrity demands it.

For The Love of Hussain

Abhinandan Mishra — Fri, 5 Mar 2010 17:19:47 EST

The MF Hussain bundle of sex, paints and goddess was once again in the news as the 95 years old Maharahstra-born Indian Picasso was granted Qatari citizenship.

The ever active intellectual guardian population of India ably lead by Miss Booker Arundhati Roy have been raising a heart rendering hue and cry ever since this news broke and have cast a serious doubts on the Indian establishment on their ability to protect "genuine expression of art" and the repeated attack on the more sacrosanct Freedom of Expression enshrined in the Indian constitution.

I am a just bit worried that how much more battering our poor old Constitution will be able to withstand. Every alternate day some Tom, Dick and Harilal rises up with a copy of the Constitution waving in the air and shouting on the top of their voice that " The fundamental rigfhts of Mr.X has been violated".

After the initial war cry has been shouted, the constitution is consigned to flames, not literally though.

What starts with a question of fundamental Rights turns into an opportunity to gain spotlight and to show that "yeah we are still alive and protecting the intellectual wealth" of India from the saffronist dacoits.

But in this high flying emotive surcharge environment the real issue is lost. Always, without fail.

Forgotten is why is the common people who worship goddess not allowed to feel offend when some one paints those very goddess in nude. Where do their religious rights vanish?

Forgotten is why the religious sentiments ( not the cliche one, but the real one, the one which makes us bow our head whenever we pass a temple) not kept in mind by these intellectuals when they cry over the treatment meted out to people like Hussain.

Forgotten is why Hussain never apologised on the second place after it is forgotten that he should have been asked that why did he chose to paint only Hindu gods in nude in first place.

Miss.Bookers like people shout on the vandalization that was done to Mr.Hussain's painting but they don't ask the Indian Picasso that was not he aware that religion is an integral part of any Indian, be it Hindu or Muslim.

Let's put an open question to our " intellectuals" on What they will choose if given two choices.

Whether the intellectuals will focus on freedom of expression or they will shout violation of breach of privacy if this very Picasso paints them or their close one in nude.

Now that he has shifted his base to Qatar all that remains to be seen is that whether he will express his creativity like the same way as he used to in India.

I have stayed in Qatar and if i am even 10 percent right then I don't think he will even think of letting his artistic creativity go wild.

Hussain should not live under any disillusionment, Allahs right has always been more enforceable in any part of the world, be it India or Qatar.

But in the end it is not about a Muslim artist and a Hindu godess, it is about an Indian artist and an Indian god.

Every Place is Kansas Now, Tiger

Aaman Lamba — Sat, 20 Feb 2010 09:51:24 EST

Watching Tiger Woods apologize on television yesterday was a disconcerting sight. One was more used to seeing the iconic golfer talk about his game and recent victories. He seemed robotic and uncomfortable. In the end, his apology rambled for too long and didn't quite convince one to pick up the phone and call now, operators standing by. If it was intended as an apology, it stank. If it was an advertisement, it didn't sell the brand - it perhaps diminished it further.

Tiger Woods had no real reason to apologize to the public. He said what he had to say to his family and his sponsors. That being said, perhaps the role of the public figure does make him accountable to some extent to the people at large, but even so, he was apologizing for what will likely not change.

I visited the Kinsey Institute in Bloomington, Indiana, the other day and was struck by how ornate a facade we create around our basic identities. Dr. Alfred Kinsey painstakingly documented the various facets of human sexuality in the 1930s and 40s. When his books were published there was a general uproar, but much of what he documented as outre and the exhibits on display from the period seem quite commonplace today. Our perceptions of sexuality have changed so much in the intervening period that much of it does not shock, as it must have in those days.

Certain tenets still seem to hold good though. Years after Harvey Milk and others tore down the closets people had forced them into, men still resort to lurking in lonely chatrooms and truck stops to find solace. People still make up entire false lives to cover up their basic need to explore or just to have sex. Moral police barge into private homes and expose consensual doings, demanding the 'perpetrators' pay a price for their 'sins'. Celebrities are expected to lead sacrosanct lives, even if that means more pulchritude is shoved under the proverbial carpet than it can bear, until inevitably, the curtain falls and we are left with the sad man behind the Wizard.

Dorothy, it looks like every place is Kansas now.

Nawwab and I: Turning to a Lamb

temporal — Fri, 19 Feb 2010 10:42:30 EST

N: Regrets? I've had a few...
t: What? Not again on Lucy's lawn?
N: But then again, too few to mention...
t: Thanks for confessions.
N: I did what I had to do....
t: Where is my poop-n-scoop bag?
N: This will take 4.40.
t: What are you talking about?
N: At 11am EST, Teddy Lamb would speak for 5 minutes.
t: Teddy Lamb? You mean a remorseful Tiger?
N: In five minutes, without questions he hopes to wipe it all clean.
t: Ah, the pseudo "press conference"... he certainly chewed more than he could digest.
N: Woof woof...you're a tad slow...as always.
t: Let's not go there or I will turn you over to the Humane Society.
N: You will never do it. You need me.
t: Just like the hydrant?
N: OK, stop being sarcotouchy.
t: I know what he would say.
N: "I regret letting down my family
t: ...and my friends...
N: .. and my fans...
t: ...I have sought help...
N: ...and am actively seeking rehabilitation...
t: ...(to repair my image, my handlers and enablers advise)
N: (He would never utter those words)
t: Just like he would never really own up.
N: ..."I would like to return to the game that is my life...
t: ...this time without all the women save one...
N:...and I seek your understanding and support
t: (Ladies please do not thrust yourself on me)
N: He will flash a sad smile and leave
t: ...as the select media scramble to report the non-event.
N: And Von-Siffers would form a fan club and cheer on when he shows up in India?
t: He will play in India?
N: Woof! Woof!
t: But this lamb is no Blue Eyes.

My Name is Khan Mumbai Release - Free Speech or Free Market?

Ruchi — Wed, 17 Feb 2010 08:23:10 EST

The release of Shahrukh Khan's latest movie, My Name is Khan (MNIK) eclipsed all news for about a week. The biggest story in Saturday's newspapers was without doubt its enthusiastic reception. The story was covered on the front page, various back pages and of course, the op-eds. The general tone was celebratory and unanimously supportive of SRK. The act of watching a movie was extrapolated to taking a stand for independence and free speech. And SRK's refusal to apologize deemed heroic, the one act that would serve as a tipping point for restoring democracy in Mumbai against Shiv Sena's regressive xenophobia and hooliganism. A la, Rosa Parks if you will, whose refusal to give up her seat on the public bus sparked the civil rights movement.

The real story though is not about freedom of speech or democracy or Shiv Sena's violent jingoism. At the heart of this episode is good business - and a little demo of the shape of things to come in an increasingly neo-liberal India.

SRK is a consummate businessman expanding his financial interests from film actor to producer to television, panoramic endorsements and now privatized sport. In 2008, Newsweek named as one of the 50 most powerful people in the world, one of the only two from India (Sonia Gandhi being the other). Despite this, time and again when asked of his political opinions his stock response has been that he wants only to "make people smile". For an intelligent, informed individual with significant money and influence and an alleged believer and proponent of democracy to be so consistently and overtly apolitical has to be a calculated economic decision. In this light, his refusal to retract his IPL statement too has to be deemed a personal economic decision. And the consequences would only have been economic - the money lost due to its limited initial release in Mumbai (no one expected Sena's theater vandalism to extend to the movie goers), akin to the losses incurred by traders/shopkeepers when a political party calls for a bandh against some government policy or inaction.

And yet our national news rallied behind SRK with multiple sympathetic interviews, clips and broadcast of his vaguely messianic tweets. Rajdeep Sardesai, editor of CNN-IBN exhorted every Mumbaiker to "go watch MNIK in the theatres, its a small, but important way of taking a stand" and Barkha Dutt (NDTV) earnestly claimed that "im [sic] standing up for a belief". Mumbai government deployed over 21,000 policemen to guard theatres screening MNIK and preemptively arrested over 900 Shiv Sainiks. Nary a squeak from any of our news networks about this shocking display of state repression and targeting based on political affiliation.

For Shiv Sena, this was a calculated political move - the churlish actions of a regional political party with a fragmented support base after Raj Thackeray's defection. Putting this party in its place requires not Mumbaikers flocking to the theatres to watch MNIK but media blackout. A party of this small size can't rely only on its little official mouthpiece, "Saamna" and needs the media platform for survival. However, the lurching illogic of the Thackerays is good drama, which always translates to good TRPs.

Ratings were the primary interest, not freedom of speech or taking a collective stand against divisive/undemocratic intimidation. There have been numerous other instances of clamps on freedom of speech and nowhere near this kind of sustained coverage to drive public behavior. 94-year old Husain is in exile in Dubai. Taslima Nasrin was expelled from India in 2008. Deepa Mehta's movies, Fire and Water both came under Sena and other Hindu right-wingers' ire. While the above have the right to free speech in common with MNIK's release, they lack easy marketability. And easy marketing is at the heart of this campaign: the effortless connection with India's two loves, cricket and Bollywood, a media savvy celebrity, polarizing Pakistan, a comic book goon and the perception of participation by painless retweets and mere consumption. The Save Our Tiger campaign is another example of a high gloss initiative to distract the public. Yes, there are 1411 tigers left in India and urgent measures are required - but the real solution does not lie in citizen involvement as manifested by the campaign's entreaty of "speak up, blog, sms - every little bit counts". Each is completely useless to curb poaching and/or manage sanctuaries. Neither is tiger conservation hampered by lack of funds since even the allocated funds have not been completely utilized by many sanctuaries.

The real fight for freedom of speech and democracy is the fight against our desperate poverty. Yet there is frighteningly little focus and interest in governance, the prioritization and allocation of the country's resources for its people. And there are serious issues at stake. The Food Security Act (FSA) is on the anvil. What does the FSA say about India? There are people in our country who don't even have enough food for basic sustenance. That their numbers are so large that the States and Center have spent months trying to figure out eligibility criteria and a sharing arrangement that they can afford. We also have the National Rural Employment Guarantee Act (NREGA), which entitles each rural household hundred days of unskilled work at minimum wage. This Act is testimony to the fact that we've taken an entire people of our country and thrown them out of the economy. These two legislations go at the heart of democracy and what it means to live in a just and humane society; both are going through serious upheavals. However, what is the percentage of airtime and column space afforded to either? Even worse, why is there no national passion for them?

We need to reevaluate our national priorities. Arts and sports are the underpinnings of the country's culture, and integral to national consciousness. We should rightly be passionate and proud of both. However, mere consumption cannot drive culture. And we cannot claim to be proud Indians, yet ignore Bharat.

Shiv Sena vs An Actor

Priyank Chandra — Mon, 15 Feb 2010 16:34:25 EST

Shah Rukh Khan, a Bollywood actor spoke his mind, and a political party went berserk. A movie, My Name is Khan (MNIK) got a lot of attention and the media decided that unity in India had reached the brink of a complete breakdown at the hands of some goons.

While I certainly do not condone the actions of the Shiv Sainiks, I do believe that this controversy has more sides to it than the media has attempted to stuff down our throats.

When two countries are in conflict but not yet at war, the first step that most countries take is to impose a trade embargo. It is a natural step to take because the countries need to make a stand and hurt the other country in the only peaceful way possible.

In this context, not allowing Pakistani cricketers into our country to play a sports tournament is simply an embargo on the export of human labor. A trade embargo which is meant to prove a point. And this is really what Shiv Sena is demanding albeit in a rather disruptive manner. And it does make sense in a twisted sort of way.

Of course we had not 'not allowed' them. They were just not picked by teams who strategized keeping in mind a lot of factors other than brutal nationalism. A lot of business reasons culminated in an auction where the Pakistanis were not picked. It was basic economics at work, without the need for hyperbole or fervent hatred for a country that is our neighbour and the home of these talented cricketers.

The Pakistanis felt insulted, like the cool kids in school who weren't invited to the most happening party in town. Some people attempted to assuage the hurt because they felt bad that the cool kids felt bad. Now the cool kids came from a family that had a few murderers as distant relatives. So the defenders of morality and identity decided that the nice kid had to be punished, because you should not be nice to people who belong to a family that has criminals in it. And amidst all these analogies, let me remind you that all of this was about the game of cricket.

Sports holds a place in our hearts unlike any other source of entertainment. We place it on a pedestal where we search in it all the attributes we wish to exist in our society. We sometimes treat it as war, the players as gladiators who shall fight until there is conquest and defeat and sometimes as means to a greater end, an agent of hope and change, often over-exaggerated. We have complicated a meaningless form of entertainment by imbuing it with the idealistic notions of war and peace.

But in this controversy we have one other important point. Who are these Pakistani cricketers representing in this lucrative tournament? Certainly not Pakistan, but colorful clubs who are but abstract, and rather fuzzy identities that anyone could identify with. If the Pakistanis were not here as a representation of their glorious nation Pakistan, then who could deny them the moral right to play as long as the laws were not broken. It is like banning bearded men from boarding aircrafts because Osama Bin Laden has a long beard. Or almost like some Indians not allowing Australians into the country because some random Australian attacked an Indian. Oh wait! All of this is already happening.

Let me try to bring about the absurdity of generalization with another example. It is like believing that all Maharashtrians are liberal, intelligent philosophers who bring about social change because B. R. Ambedkar was a Marathi. And this has certainly been disproved by the MNS and Shiv Sena.

And my point is made. Shiv Sena had one good idea - trade embargo but they applied it in the wrong context using the wrong methods. The Bollywood star won this round by default, just muttering meaningless statements about how being nice does not make him unpatriotic, while the political parties screamed itself sore in an act of patriotism.

Indian society is a metaphor for the complexities that surround the concept of identity, and the future holds a lot more battles of this sort for us.

It's Cool To Be Free

KG — Wed, 3 Feb 2010 19:08:45 EST

Anonymity is a convenient mask- one which I've desperately sought since I can remember. There's a reassurance in it that's hard to shake aside- this belief that you can just be there in the background observing. And contrary to popular belief, it doesn't make you a follower.

Opinions matter. Even if they are mine. Even if they are in an anonymous blog which will be read by some, commented upon by none and then forgotten.

There are some actions that infuriate you into action. One was a police officer smiling mockingly when he walked out of court having escaped punishment for abetting in a young girl's suicide.

The other was tonight when I watched Uddhav Thackeray eloquently shrug his shoulders on NDTV's 9'O Clock news- in response to a question as to whether the release of My Name is Khan would pass unhindered.

It was an action that repeated tales that I want to believe that my generation has moved on from- the chasm of regionalism.

I'd be lying if I said I didn't find the Shiv Sena's rhetoric preposterous. I do- not only is it utterly reprehensible but also it strikes me as extremely lazy politics. Which is exactly why the Sena is in the state they are in today. Gone are the days when people were taken in by proclamations of nationalism and pride- it has been almost 63 years of independence- and let's face it- to me and my generation, freedom means a good deal more than empty words. Which is exactly why it is lazy. A true opposition would have taken advantage of the woeful apology of a government that is Maharashtra's and swept into power. On real issues which would've made more sense than stopping the screening of a film or calling Chidambaram the Home Minister of Pakistan- a statement so laughably juvenile that you wouldn't hear it even in a school level debate.

Even that is fine- everyone can say what they want. But when you use muscle power to stop the screening of a movie because it's actor has said something to annoy you, you need to take a good look at yourself. And coming from me and my ilk that really is something- we- who are so used to being steeped in cynicism that ideals are far from our thoughts. But even in a generation of cynics, this marks a new low. Open threats on national TV aren't my idea of democracy. Actually they shouldn't be anyone's idea of democracy.

Of course 'Bollywood' (I hate the term, hence the quote marks) has notoriously pandered to the whims of the Shiv Sena and Bal Thackeray since- well forever. For some reason they've had a curious hold over the film business. Which in itself is disturbing, not to mention downright wrong. What riles me even more is not that they're against Valentine's Day or lesbianism (read Fire)- but the fact that they take it upon themselves to force that down everyone's throat. And tonight I sat watching amused, but mostly infuriated when the legal chief of the Shiv Sena says that the campaign against the movie is a 'movement' started by the 'people' and he could not guarantee what the 'people' would do when the movie released.

That's such a load of crap.

And they know it. They must be knowing it. Surely they aren't that self deluded to think that 'all people of the country' feel this way. And they're milking the issue for all it is worth. Which would be fine as long as they kept their hands in their pockets instead of on lathis and guns, and not calling up theatre owners threatening them with 'dire consequences' if the movie was screened.
And I've been accused of looking too much into history before- maybe it's a disease- but all this rhetoric about 'people's movement' and 'people's anger' was exactly how Herr Adolf began. Or Mugabe. Or any other dictator.

I'm no admirer of Shah Rukh Khan. But I must say that what he's said is admirable. Even if it is a ploy to sell his film. Even if all he wants to do is to be on the news and even if it is the 'in thing' to hate him- despite all those things, what he's said is admirable. I'm glad he's not going to apologize. I do not want an apology from the Thackerays either. They can say what they like- but coercion is just not done. And the Tiger of the Sena Bal Thackeray should realise he's actually being a mouse. This is the behaviour of cowards not leaders. Cowards who want to cling on to something rather than face oblivion.

The whole question of identity is curious. I am from Karnataka, born in Andhra Pradesh, schooled in Maharashtra, now in Karnataka. And I'm a Hindu and it has been so incidental. I've had-er- have wonderful friends who are Christians, a rather special half Muslim friend and it's never made one bit of difference. And yes I've loathed certain people who happen to be Muslim but not because of it- they were just gutter rats who happened to be Muslim.

Which is why I don't get the Sena appeasement by the likes of even Amitabh Bachchan what with him organising private screenings from the self proclaimed 'Tiger'. Shouldn't he have taken a stand against this war mongering? And when asked as much by Barkha Dutt, a visibly squirming Jaya Bachchan said 'the film industry stands together in a national crisis.' Which implies of course that this isn't one. (More on that here http://blogs.widescreenjournal.org/?p=1806)

And yes, I've been called too liberal although I'm not sure I understand that. It is like saying 'too free'- one is either free or not. Can you be free one day and enslaved the next? One is either liberal or one is not- you cannot grade freedom or liberalism. But the difference is that liberalism is a choice I've made. Freedom isn't- we ARE a free country whether you like it or not.

And that's something.

Phir Mile Sur or Frivolous Mile Sur?

sufferingsocrates — Wed, 27 Jan 2010 06:13:19 EST

India celebrated its 60th Republic Day yesterday. A moment every Indian, including I, am proud of. India is expressing itself on the global stage, and Indians are becoming confident, self-assured and assertive, all in a positive sense. Perhaps its this freedom of expression that is running deep in all of India. Especially it would seem, among the emboldened and influential television medium.

This Republic Day was more remembered for the spiced and hyped Phir Mile Sur, a rehash of the 1988 original version by Doordarshan. Spiced, because of a skimpily clad Deepika Padukone and banyan clad Salman Khan amongst other Bollywood celebrities (even Karan Johar found a place!), and hyped because it was apparently 'released' by Amitabh Bacchan. Now, what bemuses me no end is what do these esteemed figures stand for? Are they the epitome of Indian patriotism or Indian achievements?

I wish I weren't cynical. But the way the new Phir Mile Sur has been done up, looks very botched, annoyingly long and at times even ridiculous. It looks more like a marketing gimmick to win TRPs for Zoom television. It was good old Doordarshan days which brought about the original Mile Sur Mera Tumhara (see original below). Zoom has been one of the gossip channels promoting everything from Bollywood to Bollywood (pun intended).

In the guise of a fresh new look for an amazingly original and endearing Mile Sur Mera of the 1980s, the new version has been launched with so much of Bollywood emphasis that the Olympics medal winners have been pushed to the very end of the music video. I wonder what is it that Bollywood has done to represent India, unlike Olympic Champions like Abhinav Bindra? Even in the new Mile Sur Mera, Salman has no qualms appearing in his vest. I am thankful he didn't remove it to show his true patriotic colors!

When A.R. Rehman re-created Vande Mataram in 1997, it was truly a magical rendering which was soulful, fresh and pleasing to the eyes. Rehman had re-done the tunes of the original song, and his mastery was clearly on display. Sadly for Phir Mile Sur, neither is it original, nor does the video look pleasing on the eyes. The music tries to retain the original Mile Sur Mera tune, with traditional music and tunes, but keeps losing track and gets completely boring at over 15 minutes. For me, personally the music and the video look more like an advertisement for Bollywood to promote its patriotic self, and what better a platform than Zoom TV?

Come to think of it, the media seems to be playing the devil's advocate. Times of India promoted Aman Ki Asha, as if this was the only hope left for India and Pakistan. It ran ads and then a music concert to promote its idea of a peaceful neighborhood with Pakistan. While the intentions are right, I can't think of one reason why patriotism would be etched in the minds of those who come to music concerts. Yet again, a hypocritical approach to promote patriotism while on its own channel, accusations from and to India and Pakistan are made literally everyday. I wish there was an Aman Ki Asha mission for these debates.

All said and done, the true sense of spreading patriotism can only come from those who have represented the nation. It can certainly not be celebrities who only want to market their own brand and themselves. They can be enablers for the mission, but cannot be the mission itself. It is sportsmen, and most importantly the politicians and ministers themselves who should go around promoting patriotism. It is important for people to feel that they should be as patriotic as their leaders or sportsmen, not be dreaming about acting patriotism for a music video.

You may now ask if I liked the original Mile Sur Mera. Of course I did, because it was pure, original and very well done. The message and the music was short and crisp. There was no attempt to forcefully include all major Bollywood celebrities individually. Sickeningly, the new Mile Sur does just that, and is very much in the face. It is unfortunate that patriotism has gone into the hands of privately owned channels unlike the fading Doordarshan which created the Mile Sur magic. I wonder where is Shiv Sena to protest the skimpily clad Deepika Padukone in Phir Mile Sur now.

The original:

TV Review: Colors Bingo Fails to Click

Aaman Lamba — Sat, 23 Jan 2010 11:39:58 EST

Colors Bingo premiered after a melange of promos over the last month, including a muddled Twitter campaign termed @iamaarami - that had little connection with the show. This wasn't the last thing to go wrong with the show, which is Abhishek Bachchan's television debut.

To put it baldly, Colors Bingo is the worst, most ill-conceived poorly produced product-promo show ever on television. Amitabh Bachchan rendered a few dialogues, random people stood up and a trusty sidekick seemed to have no role to play other than interrupt proceedings randomly. The other sidekick was even less relevant than a gangster's moll to the main action.

The first episode garnered viewership with the presence of the Big B, but the repeated Paa shtick seemed tired and overdone. The game is stacked against the viewer/audience, with the celebrity guest standing to win over Rs. 25 lakhs while they can get only Rs. 1 lakh. Psychologically, seeing the celeb win doesn't do much for the viewers or the audience. Amitabh Bachchan did give his winnings away to charity, setting an excellent example, but there's no guarantee other celebs will do this.

Online reactions seemed to be universally negative, ranging from opinions that the show was boring to views that it was confusing. People seemed to be clicking away to other channels, such as Star Plus' Music Ka Maha Muqqabla, which featured Shah Rukh Khan. Some pretty good singers were on the show when we switched to it.

It seems unlikely Colors Bingo will sustain beyond the first season, but the fan following is sure to give it quite a bit of momentum.

Jyoti Basu, Grand Communist, Dies at 95

Aaman Lamba — Sun, 17 Jan 2010 06:15:58 EST

No sooner were the reports of Jyoti Basu's death at the age of 95 confirmed that Mamata Banerjee proclaimed him 'the first and last chapter of the Left Front government'. He had a strong camaraderie with even her, and his towering leadership over the Bengal Communist party cadre was in a large part responsible for the 23 years of uninterrupted rule of the CPI(M) in West Bengal.

While West Bengal might have fallen behind in the developmental race, Jyoti Basu's land reforms and labour movements made a strong mark on West Bengal. The inability of the party and ideological freeze made it impossible for Jyoti Basu and the state to move into the market-led economic transformation in the nineties. Nevertheless, his legacy extends beyond strikes and industrial inaction.

His biography is almost a chronicle of international Communism, from his student organizing activities in the United Kingdom during the War. The Communist Party was declared illegal in India between 1940 and 1951, and Comrade Basu continued to work behind the scenes to facilitate underground leaders' meetings and interactions with the Congress Party. When the CPI split in 1964, he opted for the CPI(M) and joined the Politburo. He was first elected to the West Bengal Assembly in 1946, and became Deputy Chief Minister in 1969. His first stint as Chief Minister of West Bengal commenced in 1977, and he ruled uninterrupted upto 2000, when he retired for health reasons. He almost became the Prime Minster of India in 1996, until the Politburo vetoed the idea, which he termed a 'historic blunder'.

The Left Front is at a crossroads, with declining vote shares and the prospect of losing its home base, West Bengal, in the Assembly elections next year.