Posted On Friday, February 08, 2013 at 09:00:28 AM
|
|
|
 |
|
The use of a slang in the song has angered the National Commission for Women
|
Attempting the impossible is possible, especially if you want to fail. Here is a contextually relevant idea. Some protectors of cinematic propriety should go into the archaeological mode and bring out all the Hindi films ever released, identify offensive lyrics and sue the makers, some of whom might be dead or out of action by now.
The point one is making is: why has the National Commission for Women singled out the ‘Fevicol Se’ track from Dabangg 2? The Commission has sent a notice to maker Arbaaz Khan for using words like ‘laundiya’, usually viewed as an offensive slang for describing a woman, in the song’s lyrics.
Since the song had been okayed by the Censor Board, does this mean that the maker of the future will watch his film pass through more filters of scrutiny before obtaining the green signal to release the product? What’s more, even if that happens which would be plain ridiculous, does any maker have the guarantee that his film won’t confront any obstacles thereafter? Even now, he doesn’t.
Every time any such problem rears its head, simplistic conclusions surround us from all sides. One, we have no business to mess around with the dignity of the woman. Two, freedom of speech and expression is a fundamental right. The latter, we all know, exists in theory alone.
Three, we are reminded that the man’s mindset must change which, in this case, means that of the maker Arbaaz Khan. The real issue — and this is seldom talked about — is that of unpredictability. No maker knows which part of his film will be crucified, by whom and why.
Hindi cinema has had a history of songs with lyrics in which explicit suggestiveness can be missed by none: right from Mere Angane Main in Laawaris to Saat Saheliyan in Vidhaata.
Shouldn’t these songs have been erased from our cinematic records first before the Commission took on a new film? Logically speaking, yes. But then, whenever any such assault on vulgarity — or what is interpreted as vulgarity — takes place, logic flies out of the window.
Besides, nobody wants to attempt the impossible as said earlier, basic common sense being all it takes to realise that a complete failure is inevitable. The item song is flippant, naughty, raunchy, and meant to titillate the frontb e n c h e r s and make them gravitate to the theatres. If we have to start finding reasons to attack one such song, what can we expect next?
Elimination of lovemaking scenes, most of which are laughable anyway? Removal of scenes that show kissing on the lips, because any private moment must be kept private?
Abolition of the bikini, since showing the female body commodifies the woman? Shall we return to the days when two roses met outside the window on the first wedding night, resulting in the wife’s pregnancy?
Taking a small step forward followed by a huge step backward isn’t progress. A mind that is mature and liberal accepts what it dislikes.
Till the inhabitants of our society reach that stage, we will waste our precious time on issues that don’t deserve to be the focus of attention and protest.
(The writer is a senior city-based journalist)
|