Cinema. For a movie-loving nation such as India, Cinema is extremely important to the average Indian. And Hindi cinema more so, with all its melodrama and over acting, forms the very crux of the entire concept of films in India. Ardeshir Irani, a parsee gentleman, set the ball rolling in 1933 when he made the first Indian movie called Alam Ara, containing no less than 50 songs. General knowledge will tell you this. But irony will tell you that it had a majority of Muslim characters. So you see, the minorities were among the first to stake their claim on Indian cinema - especially the Muslims.

The above point is very crucial when we mention Fundamentalism and Indian Cinema in the same sentence (such as the title here). I believe that Indian Cinema is a true record of the various social landscapes that our country has adorned through various decades. Of course, there are sections of the society or self-proclaimed intellectual circles who are totally indifferent to the concept of Indian Cinema. The attitude here revolves around - "Oh! Hindi films? Yeah, my wife/son/daughter are fond of it.. Time pass hai, aur kya". This is WRONG. If one is really sensitive and has the right mindset, then we could construct the entire framework of society and learn more about it, just by looking at films.



Like any other art form, Hindi cinema has its own drama. Stark, on-your-face realism is not something that cinema is made for, but in the guise of drama, realism re-presents itself. Art imitates life. I think Hindi Cinema is more of a dream. Dreams don't offer you realism, they have a different reality. When we sleep, all our organs - the heart, lungs, liver, brain etc continue functioning. But then how do we sleep if the brain is working? Nature's answer is dreams. Instead of thinking sharply about things around you, the brain starts dreaming - it takes reality and softens it and turns it into symbols. It is for a psychoanalyst to analyze what the dream means. Similarly, Hindi Cinema is not reporting the exact reality around you. But if you are smart enough to decode what is happening in the films you see, you will deduce the collective thinking of society, understand it and better understand what fundamentalism means.

I am a Hindu Fundamentalist, for I believe in the fundamentals of Hinduism. Sadly, the media's use of the term 'Fundamentalism' has changed over decades and now represents a very negative vibe. The same goes for communism. These are terms that only point to a healthier lifestyle, but over the years they have come to be associated with people who are, in true sense, radicals and religious extremists who take the holy word literally without galvanizing its true meaning. If we continue to observe this negative interpretation of Communism, we realize that it is a monolith. All the communities will be communal, or all will tone down their fervor. And this reflects on cinema.

In the same tone as above, we could broadly use Indian Cinema as a yardstick to gauge the forms of Communism, and the social culture, that India has traversed. Our villains can tell us more about India's social transformation than most history text books can. In the 40's the villain was the zameendar or jageerdar, reflecting on the broad social-economic divide prevalent then. In the 50's, the villain was the rich man, factory owner or the seth, which is evidence to the fact that we were thinking of a more socialist pattern of society. In the 60's, just as India started embracing urbanization from the west, the villain was the underworld boss of the big, bad city. By the 70's, we had the very same gangster turn into the hero in films and in the 80's, when the ugly head of corruption first raised its head, the politician or the policeman was the villain. When the partition happened in 1947, the trauma was such that Indian Cinema refused to accept that it happened, because it was something that was out of its idiom. Indian cinema refused to touch this topic and for several years, no Muslim characters were written and actors like Yusuf Khan had to adopt Hindu names like Dileep Kumar to remain in films. In the 90's, Pakistan made a comeback and became a major villain, albeit with much stronger sentiments.
Now, thankfully, we have no villains because villains have a frightening resemblance to us. We see ourselves in them and thus the situation that makes us do the evils of everyday life has become the villain in Hindi Cinema today.

We very often confuse Fundamentalism and communism with issues that cause inter-community riots. But films have taught us otherwise. Films have taught us that it doesn't require two communities to create ruckus. One misguided community, fraught with an erroneous understanding of fundamentalism, is enough to do the trick. A classic example of this is Deepa Mehta's Water. And though it meant to depict the very point I mentioned, it did that without even making the film. Here was a Hindu lady, who was using Hindu actors to make an Indian film about the pre-independence cruelties that widows were subjected to. Set in the 1930's, Water aimed to highlight the brutal treatment of widows, who were forced into a life of poverty. It told the story of how a Gandhi-follower helps a widow to escape these unfair restrictions. The film was violently opposed, with 'fundamentalist' thugs destroying the film's sets and the then BJP government in the state (UP) and centre, encouraging the provocations. The stink reached all the way to PM Vajpayee's office, while senior leaders Uma Bharati and L K Advani openly propagated violent protests. Several prominent social figures supported Mehta, but the film only ran into more trouble. After several talks, re-casts and crucial cuts to the film, Water was allowed to complete. It wanted to showcase the existence of Hindu radicals in a by-gone era, but ended up showcasing their existence even today.

It is not un-common for films to run into trouble with 'fundamentalists'. Films by other Indian-based directors have also come into conflict with Hindu fundamentalists and the authorities, including Black Friday, Mani Ratnam's Bombay, Gulzar's Maachis and other films like Fire, Aaja Nachle, Ek Choti Si Love Story etc. But Water faced the heat of these misguided vandals like none other and forced us to introspect on the society that we inhabit. Films like the Oscar-winner Slumdog Millionaire barely skimmed the surface of India's concept of Communism, while others like Rakyesh Mehra's Rang De Basanti fought with Communism issues and exposed the true rot that corrupts India.

But the worst is behind us. Communism is no longer a saleable commodity and the future looks promising. The generation of today can safely go forward without any pretensions or biases and will hopefully restore Fundamentalism to its rightful place, guided and constructive. In a few decades, there will come a time when films like Water will be shot without any undue obstructions. The current generation are a smart folk with healthy thoughts.

And, of course, it has started reflecting in cinema.