|
|
|
|
|
| HOME | NEWS | DEAR REDIFF | |||
|
ASSEMBLY POLL '98
|
|
|
'There has to be a renaissance of intelligent independent thinkers in India'
E-mail from readers the world over
Date sent: Wed, 16 Dec 1998 15:54:16 -0600 Nobody is asking any of the so-called protectors to adopt the lifestyles depicted in the movie, Fire! After all, it is just a movie, we or our children are not going to see one movie and change their lifestyle altogether! Give some trust to our younger generation! It is perfectly fine if some people think homosexuality is not a valid lifestyle. If they think so, it is fine. But there are movies with lots of violence and drugs and all that, and nobody assumes that our children are going to pick up all that they see in the movies. I am totally surprised by the communal colour given to this whole thing. Why should we, as Indians, look at everyone's opinions after screening his/her religious background first? Why can't people who shout in the streets, think and talk against the ideas instead of categorising people in terms of their religions? The whole thing is so stupid, there has to be a renaissance of intelligent independent thinkers in India, who can talk without losing their heads, who can look at opinions with an open mind. In this modern era, we have to give value to other's opinions, we have to let people see what they want. We can do propaganda, but not like dancing semi-nude in front of somebody's house. Not like abusing the people who have put their effort in making a movie, however bad it is. If Indians have to survive as a country towards the next millennium, with the values of respect and freedom in our younger generation, with the due respect from the rest of the world, let these clowns stop dancing in the streets of India, protesting about a simple movie, remember the whole world is watching us. Don't humiliate India anymore!
Date sent: Wed, 16 Dec 1998 10:40:02 -0800
I find the entire premise of this article flawed.
There are three quotes in this article as follows :
-- "We don't mind if homosexuality was shown but did they have to name them
Radha and Sita?" The author of this article seems to think these three quotes represent all of mainstream Indian and Hindu thinking about acceptance of homosexuality and the so-called "alternate" lifestyles. (Being a Hindu conservative, I use the terms Indian and Hindu interchangeably here). These quotes are from people who are either extremely liberal in their personal views or are using this issue to stoke some completely misplaced religious passions. I find this next sentence from the article completely hilarious: "The next battle will be to see whether the Hindutva forces accept homosexuality as a legitimate and valid lifestyle. That will determine whether they are really a Hindu version of the Taliban or a reaction to the lop-sided nature of secularism in this civilisation." To equate a conservative, rational, and culturally secure Hindu with the fanatic, crazy Taliban, just because mainstream Hindus do not accept and condone homosexuality is a completely specious argument. Take this one too: "We are now beyond the homophobic situation that exists in the West." This one takes the cake! Just because three people out of 900 million said homosexuality is "OK?!" I think not! This guy needs to wake up and smell the coffee. I am not a homophobe and I realise this whole gay "lifestyle" thing is not a "choice" -- these guys are just made that way. I am neither for nor am I against this "lifestyle." I really couldn't care less what these guys do on their own time -- it's their choice, and I know this is quite common in India. However, they need to realise the Hindu establishment is a long way from legitimising or even accepting this whole phenomenon of homosexuality. Do us a favour, Rediff, and try and get someone that uses better logic and makes more sense to write for you the next time around... Nitin Harkara
Date sent: Wed, 16 Dec 1998 10:28:42 -0800 Interesting interview. I thought 'characters' like Sudha Churi existed only in the Stone Ages. God help all the 'Mahilas' her organisation represents.
Date sent: Tue, 15 Dec 1998 16:25:27 +0530 I am all for freedom of expression. But I want to know when Satanic Verses was banned, where was this freedom of expression brigade? Or was it too scared of receiving fatwas?
Date sent: Tue, 15 Dec 1998 18:15:12 +0800 Very excellent. We Indians are thinking Kashmir is ours. Similarly Pakistan. So, we should have determined ourself first about this idea. Then we can build up public opinion. But, if this is the case, then other states will also start the same thing -- a separate country from the Union of India.
Date: Sun, 01 Nov 1998 23:45:34 -0500 The report that the law should be enacted to confiscate wealth amassed by corrupt practices, may find a very favourable response from many quarters as it's high time corruption was checked in India. The failure to curb corruption of politicians, bureaucrats, industrialists, traders, etc will destroy the very fabric of Indian democracy and entity. Thank you for highlighting such news. Avantikumar Dave
Date: Fri, 09 Oct 1998 02:25:17 +0530 This article should have been read out (since they cannot read or write) to the helpless poor of rural West Bengal -- this sort of drivel being posted on the net? As a test case I am willing to e-mail this to some people abroad -- you can imagine their probable reactions. I sometimes feel sorry for myself at being born in India -- but I immediately feel great when I think of the worse prospect of being ruled by the trash in West Bengal or Bihar. I think Nehru got it wrong (as usual) --"if there is a hell on earth this is it, this is it, this is it -- I of course refer to West Bengal and Bihar.
Date sent: Sat, 28 Nov 1998 12:40:58 -0800 I have always been a great fan of your reviews, and somehow I feel that you are are not correct in branding the music as junk. IMHO, the music is lilting and pleasing... I am not sure whether you watched this movie with a pre-conceived notion or with cotton up your ears, but your review on A R Rahman's music really irks, and that's the big hole in otherwise a pretty decent review! Sorry if I am rude, but please be just!
Date sent: Tue, 01 Dec 1998 12:47:50 +0530 A very comprehensive questionnaire. But it should include better quality pictures which can become a selling point for the film too. If possible, a link to online ticket booking can be given in the feature itself. Ajay P
Date sent: Tue, 15 Dec 1998 08:41:34 -0800 (PST) When I think of the name Shobha Warrier, why do the words snooty, conceited, opinionated come immediately to mind? Perhaps because, as a reader, I expect a journalist to inform me, without peppering his or her writing with personal bias. Perhaps because I seek enlightenment, not soapbox rabble-rousing. An instance in point to illustrate: With, first, two quotes from her piece on Mani Ratnam: "... a director who commercialised sensitive issues for personal glory," and "I could sense no sincerity in any of his films. For him, India's problems were just themes to strike gold." The obvious question that comes to mind when I read this is, what makes Ms Warrier an expert on Mani's, or any other film-maker's, inner motivations? With what authority does she say -- without the safety net of a "maybe", even, but as a definitive, this-is-so-because-I-say-so statement, that Mani sees India's problems as themes to strike gold? After reading this, I then happened to read her latest, on the director who made the film Oru Kann, Oru Parvai. I understand, from her piece, that this is a bureaucrat who in course of work came in contact with the story of a dalit girl who was blinded in course of a caste incident. Caste is a national, sensitive issue. Here is a director who, I am told, turned that into a film. Am I justified in asking, how is Mani "commercialising India's problems," but Rajashekaran is not? I don't mean to imply that Rajashekaran is after a quick buck -- I merely intend to point out that if you wish to be -- and to be seen to be -- unbiased, then you should apply the same yardstick to both directors. Or am I missing something here? When I read Shobha's piece on Oru Kann, what strikes me is the absolute absence of questioning, the blind acceptance of all that is said. The director talks of realism, of wanting to make a point, to highlight an admittedly tragic issue -- and the journalist, completely awed by her subject, does a tape recorder, faithfully reproducing his words. Journalism surely implies some degree of probing, of questioning? For instance, did Shobha ask Rajashekaran if he was not "striking gold" through a national tragedy? One last point. Did the author, who is obviously overawed by big names from the West, ever hear of a Steven Spielberg? Who made a seminal movie titled Schindler's List? Was Spielberg, in her opinion, minting gold out of a global catastrophe? Or was he touched by an incident that survives, to this day, as a blot on the collective conscience, and did he make the movie in order to share with us his sense of outrage? Film-makers down the years, from David Lean on down to Mani Ratnam and Rajashekaran, do draw their inspiration from real life tragedies. They interpret it based on their own artistic vision. For one individual journalist, of dubious credentials and suspect credibility, to confer sainthood on the one and put horns on the other is, frankly, well below the journalistic standards I expect to see on Rediff On The NeT. Shibhani
Date sent: Thu, 10 Dec 1998 11:43:09 -0500 Her point is right. Nothing is imposed on this society by screening the movie in theaters. It has been certified by sensors and running in theatres according to law. If you and your family want to see it, do it. Otherwise, please keep quiet. Either Shiv Sainiks or BJP or whoever the hell is -- don't have the right to tell us what we should not to do or what we should do. There are thousands of theatres, many of them run by politicians or with the help of them that are playing some special morning or night shows all over the country. From school boys to old men are queuing to watch those movies. Is it not spoiling your culture? How many arts and cultures we have showing sexuality? By seeing them your kids are not getting corrupted. It is the politicians or some people like Shiv Sainiks making these kind of issues to gain something. It is we, who have to decide what to see what not to see. As long as we are not encroaching others freedom we should be allowed to live on our own likes and dislikes. That should be the good culture of a community.
Pandiya Kumar Rajamony
Date: Tuesday, December 15, 1998 10:34 PM Thank you. I am a diehard fan of Kambli. Hopefully he will be back in the Indian team soon, and he and Sachin will win the World Cup for us. Again thanks a lot. Pratik
|
||
|
HOME |
NEWS |
BUSINESS |
SPORTS |
MOVIES |
CHAT |
INFOTECH |
TRAVEL
SHOPPING HOME | BOOK SHOP | MUSIC SHOP | HOTEL RESERVATIONS PERSONAL HOMEPAGES | FREE EMAIL | FEEDBACK |
||