By Rupa Sengupta
Taking a stand is tricky business. Bollywood A-lister Deepika Padukone probably knew that when she showed up at strife-torn Jawaharlal Nehru University (JNU) on January 7. As this paper has reported, the storm that followed seems to have temporarily hit her brand, with some advertisers signalling a go-slow on the actor till the dust settles.
Doubtless Padukone’s detractors will say I-told-you-so. Her JNU special appearance reportedly provoked one supercilious sniper to state that ‘an actor should be an actor’ and another to say that the ‘heroine’ should stay in tinsel town and ‘dance’. A question naturally arises, and not just because both potshot-takers were politicians. Why do celebrity touchdowns in ideological war-zones raise hackles?
(Reuters)
Indians are known to be a politically savvy lot. Yet, there’s this time-worn notion that glamour professionals should conceal, or correct, their opinions, if they have any.
As indicated by Baba Ramdev’s reported comment that Padukone needs to understand the country better, and requires advisers like him, most film stars are seen as socially, politically and culturally deracinated. Many view them as living in a bubble, oblivious to the struggles of the social jungle where people’s political representatives must ensure that survival isn’t just for the richest.
Many movie celebrities themselves bolster this idea by claiming to be ‘apolitical’. Their hands-off, no-comments stance suits a territorial section of the political class and its supporters who seem to think that cinema is only meant to entertain — and the women in it even more so. In their eyes, activist or politically ambitious actresses are a particular abomination.
In 2018, when Naresh Agrawal was denied a Samajwadi Party ticket to the Rajya Sabha, he rued that he had been sidelined for a nominee who used to dance and act in films. The lady in question was Jaya Bachchan. That she was an acclaimed movie veteran seemed lost on the miffed party-hopper till criticism made him express his regrets.
The political script generally is that film stars don’t have the chops to compete off-screen with politicians to do what they do: address weighty issues with programmes and policies. Audiences might applaud filmy dialogues about poverty, injustice, crime or corruption. But to go from celluloid drama to actual public service and bona fide activism is considered too giant a leap for pin-up personalities.
There’s a dollop of hypocrisy here that’s long marked the politics of expediency. Film celebrities are expected to be mute on burning issues by netas who consider them shallow, frivolous or illinformed. Yet, they are wooed by political parties thanks to the fame and adulation that make them crowd-pullers. The calculation is that, come election time, they can be coached to parrot party lines and used as vote-catchers.
The rest of the time vocal celebrities become irritants, unless they echo political bosses. Those who fight elections and then claim to discover the ‘cesspool’ of politics quit soon enough. Those who aren’t persuaded that politics is murky, or want it reformed, persevere, often thanklessly. Those who wish to levitate above the so-called cesspool join upper houses. Those who don’t actively enter the political fray, but dare to critique it, get slammed.
Interestingly, there’s another section of people who, seeking role models among movie icons, chide celebrities for not speaking up. From their perspective, fame confers power and with star power comes responsibility. So, while Padukone is praised for her JNU stand, other Bollywood biggies are rebuked for silence or fence-sitting.
Outspokenness and reticence are both democratic rights, though. Just as no celebrity can be bashed for expressing a viewpoint, no one can be compelled to opinionate on public demand. But on this score, there’s another catch. When film personalities make a political point, it’s called a publicity stunt. When they don’t, they’re accused of playing safe to protect their commercial interests.
For Bollywood, it’s clearly a case of damned if you do and damned if you don’t. But if recent protests in Delhi and Mumbai show anything, it’s that more and more members of the film fraternity seem ready to be damned, not if, but because they do.
Coming back to territory demarcators who feel actors should stick to reel- life and not wade into political and ideological battles, I have two questions for them. Since actors often become politically aware before becoming politicians, could this counsel apply to an M G Ramachandran, an N T Rama Rao, a Sunil Dutt or a Rajinikanth? Or is it reserved only for the female of the showbiz species? If it’s the latter, I have another question. Seriously, have they never heard of J Jayalalithaa?
DISCLAIMER : Views expressed above are the author’s own.