Gandhi-Nehru
Films at box office, politics at......
Films and politics have several things in common. Bollywood has demonstrated it too well in last few decades. One that is yet to strike the imagination of a film maker is its respective cause and effect cycle.
Deewar, Sholay, and movies of that genre discovered what the audience relished. But the class that Kagaz Ke Phool, Mera Naam Joker , Amrapali, Shaan, etc. belonged to, were consigned to dumping ground, never to be retried despite the quality and value inherent therein.
Admiration is thus an index which gets recycled in more accentuated form.
Same thing happens in politics. Irrespective of the stuff, whether rubbish or exotic, which a leader playing to the gallery , offers to get popular public acclaim, assumes the form of future political course on which rut the state would either surge suffer.
India is a case in point. In past six decades or more, we have withstood imbecile admiration of leaders' acts of little value. We have over-rated a Gandhi as being a Mahatma, without defining what is meant by a Mahatma in a land where we had so many that no implied definitions are at all called for. Swami Vivekanand , Ramkrishna or Raman Maharishi are not called Mahatma, but Gandhi is so called, because perhaps Rabindranath Tagore gave Gandhi this prefix in reciprocation of Gandhi giving him 'Gurudev'.
There is nothing wrong in giving credit to Gandhi, Nehru or any one downward , what is wrong is that public psyche is fragile, it picks up wrong signals that often interdicts right perception to hold the field while the wrong one rules the roost. What a popular leader said, even though in misconception, becomes a guideline for future.
India began to laud Gandhi and Nehru, may be still it does.
Just refer to one single prescription that either Gandhi or any contemporary leader gave , worth following which produced a result that India may be proud of.
If an answer is offered, I may tell about the illusion concomitant or hidden therein . But I , for one, know that no one would dare spell out a word , but if one ventures, a non-response would accost as soon as a question is put up.
Be that Atal or Namo, they may be credited or discredited for either success or failure, but to either berate or over-rate them as we have done in case of Gandhis - Nehrus etc, would be retrogressive . Much retrogression India continues to endure is due to the above said conditioning from which freedom is more expedient than it was that from the British Rule from which freedom would have come by default even if Gandhi wasn't there, like it happened in case of numerous colonial rule. Isn't it?
Films at box office, politics at......
Films and politics have several things in common. Bollywood has demonstrated it too well in last few decades. One that is yet to strike the imagination of a film maker is its respective cause and effect cycle.
Deewar, Sholay, and movies of that genre discovered what the audience relished. But the class that Kagaz Ke Phool, Mera Naam Joker , Amrapali, Shaan, etc. belonged to, were consigned to dumping ground, never to be retried despite the quality and value inherent therein.
Admiration is thus an index which gets recycled in more accentuated form.
Same thing happens in politics. Irrespective of the stuff, whether rubbish or exotic, which a leader playing to the gallery , offers to get popular public acclaim, assumes the form of future political course on which rut the state would either surge suffer.
India is a case in point. In past six decades or more, we have withstood imbecile admiration of leaders' acts of little value. We have over-rated a Gandhi as being a Mahatma, without defining what is meant by a Mahatma in a land where we had so many that no implied definitions are at all called for. Swami Vivekanand , Ramkrishna or Raman Maharishi are not called Mahatma, but Gandhi is so called, because perhaps Rabindranath Tagore gave Gandhi this prefix in reciprocation of Gandhi giving him 'Gurudev'.
There is nothing wrong in giving credit to Gandhi, Nehru or any one downward , what is wrong is that public psyche is fragile, it picks up wrong signals that often interdicts right perception to hold the field while the wrong one rules the roost. What a popular leader said, even though in misconception, becomes a guideline for future.
India began to laud Gandhi and Nehru, may be still it does.
Just refer to one single prescription that either Gandhi or any contemporary leader gave , worth following which produced a result that India may be proud of.
If an answer is offered, I may tell about the illusion concomitant or hidden therein . But I , for one, know that no one would dare spell out a word , but if one ventures, a non-response would accost as soon as a question is put up.
Be that Atal or Namo, they may be credited or discredited for either success or failure, but to either berate or over-rate them as we have done in case of Gandhis - Nehrus etc, would be retrogressive . Much retrogression India continues to endure is due to the above said conditioning from which freedom is more expedient than it was that from the British Rule from which freedom would have come by default even if Gandhi wasn't there, like it happened in case of numerous colonial rule. Isn't it?
No comments:
Post a Comment