Shilpa-Gere Kiss

Moral Policing

The Shilpa-Gere Kiss



Comments of Some Creative Indians :

Javed Akhtar, writer and lyricist:

You really cannot curtail moral policing by cutting the branches of that tree — you have to attack its roots. There's a particular mindset all over the world fostering this mindset. Thankfully, they are in a minority, but they have the power to intimidate the majority. They have economic, political and social agenda, and to increase their territories they use religion and culture as tools, under different banners to attack art exhibitions, cinema and literature. Their aim is to make society more docile and submissive. We can't do much if we just oppose stray incidents. We have to deny them legitimacy. If we tolerate them, they will proliferate. Society is at fault — at vulnerable moments we give them credibility, but we must marginalise them, instead of being intimidated by them.

Madhur Bhandarkar, film director :

It's very difficult to curtail these people as they make a hue and cry over the smallest issue and get media coverage. For instance, a big to-do was made at Traffic Signal's release, saying the word kinnar was used derogatorily in the film. But there's no such word used in the movie! Everyone has the fundamental right to express themselves within the parameters of the Constitution whether in cinema or art. If not, we'll be living with a fear psychosis. There should be strict rules to prevent such moral policing — maybe a forum of like-minded people should unite against these protests. We only speak out when situations like this occur and then forget the issue once it passes. We need to find a long-term solution.


Anita Nair, writer:

I have always wondered who these people are who sit in judgement of art and literature who think they can decide what is worthy of public consumption and what isn't? What gives them the right to govern an individual's freedom of expression? Who are these people who glower as they mouth: "Don't you think you might be corroding our traditional values?" To this day, I haven't been able to fathom how a piece of art or literature is judged to be obscene. I see that what is coy and sentimental is allowed to pass. I can see that furtive suggestions are given rampant freedom. I can see that a hint of a sexual encounter inserted merely to titillate is perfectly acceptable as long as it is couched in respectability. To me, what is obscene is a bunch of human beings dictating to the world what is obscene. It is almost scary to see how a certain insidious moral policing is already in place in our society. Unless there is strict judiciary and executive action taken, freedom of expression that is the very essence of being a democratic and secular nation will be a mockery. We curl our lip at Pakistan for being a fundamentalist state. We are aghast because the culture minister in Pakistan announced a ban in the parliament gagging theatre in Pakistan. A theatre group wrote, "We haven't received any formal notification but the Lahore Arts Council has refused to give us their halls for any play. So effectively the ban has been implemented. We will challenge once we have something in writing." But in Pakistan unwritten bans can go on indefinitely! How different are we from any fundamentalist state?

Jogen Chaudhury, artist:

It was very wrong for outsiders to come into the exhibition and disrupt it. These matters should be judged only by experts who are knowledgeable in such matters. This situation has political links. It would never have happened 20 or 30 years ago. Things are changing for the worse, and fundamentalist attitudes seem to be growing. Freedom of expression is our fundamental right according to the Constitution. The government should protect us. People making such attacks should be punished. They cannot take the law into their own hands. A system should be put in place for tackling such situations.