Cutting remarks

In an age when just about anything is accessible through the miracle of technology the squeamishness of the Indian censors about words or imagery does seem gratuitous. In that context, reports that the film Rajneeti has been vetted by the thought police of the Congress party — lest the foreign-looking protagonist and some dialogues of the film lead audiences to draw unkind parallels to some people and events — seems utterly fatuous. By agreeing to the Censor Board’s strange request, the three political functionaries have done their party and leader a dis-service.

The controversy over their alleged snip-orders has ensured that even if the lead character has not been modelled on any real personality, audiences will now be bound to hunt for similarities. Rather than judging the quality of the story and the acting prowess of the comely heroine, audiences will now be examining her purported resemblance to another leading lady. Moreover, some dialogues in the movie have got such widespread publicity that their expunging has been rendered quite redundant. No doubt the moment the lipsynching goes awry in certain scenes, cinemagoers will turn to each other and snigger about the extrapolation of some words with others.

A movie has never been a make-or-break factor in politics, as previous offerings in that genre have proved. But this kerfuffle has ensured that rather than making a broader point about the increasingly common trajectory of Indian politics, the film has elevated to conventional wisdom the notion that khadi sarees and political dynasty allude to only a particular surname. Of course the director should be tickled that his latest offering has ruffled subordinate political feathers. More people will now flock to see the film — if only to decide whether his disclaimer that it is entirely a “fictional story and bears no resemblance to any person living or dead,” rings true.