WHO WON AND WHO LOST ?

Controversy on Kamal Haasan’s Wiswaroopam Cinema

| by N.S.Venkataraman

( February 4, 2013, Chennai, Sri Lanka Guardian) The release of Viswaroopam , a film produced by actor Kamal Haasan became controversial in Tamil Nadu due to objection from some members of Muslim community regarding a few scenes that were said to be affecting their religious sentiments.

Kamal Haasan and Pooja Kumar at Vishwaroopam media meet

The film was banned by Tamil Nadu government , leading to a huge national debate in India regarding the freedom of expression and the powers of the government to curb such freedom. The controversy now has ended with the film producer yielding to the demands of the protestors.

Now, who has won and who has lost in this controversy ?

Viswaroopam episode indicate that any individual or group who have invested in their business ( in this case of Kamal Haasan investing in the cinema business) cannot afford to fight with the government, whatever may be the cause. In this case of Viswaroopam, Kamal Haasan has to bend low to save his investments, though he received unprecedented support from the media and the country men. Now, in this unsavoury battle, the question is who won and who lost .

Obviously, the biggest beneficiary is Kamal Haasan himself, who got huge publicity for his film at no cost and will now make crores of rupees, after deleting portion from the film as demanded by the fringe group of protestors. He has certainly buckled down but he has no particular reputation to lose as a fighter for any cause. All his claims that he would move away from the state or even the country to protect the cause of freedom and liberty can at best be viewed as empty rhetoric , that an actor is capable of . Kamal Haasan is an outright winner in this case from his point of view and has the last laugh.

Of course, the other big beneficiary is the fringe group of protestors, who would now pat themselves on the back for creating such a big issue, inspite of the fact that they are not a representative group of any size. They have been given recognition by the Tamil Nadu government and “honoured” by being invited for tripartite talk in which the Secretary to the government w as one of the participants.

The equal winners are the other fringe groups and professional agitators ,who have now gained confidence and courage that the state machinery can be intimidated , even by gathering just 50 people , so long as an emotive issue such as religion, caste or language can be whipped up.

The loser is the Tamil Nadu government and the Chief Minister, who may have thought , in short sighted manner , that it has taught a lesson to Kamal Haasan and in the process put great fear in the minds of all business houses about defying the government .

But , in the process, the Tamil Nadu Chief Minister has unwittingly created an impression that her government is weak and may be afraid of the protestors and violent prone groups. To this extent, it would have lost credibility amongst the thinking population and the law abiding citizens , who may suspect that the government lacks the will to govern. This would do severe long term damage to the reputation of the Tamil Nadu Chief Minister, as this episode will stay in the mind of the people for a long time.

In the coming days, it is more than likely that the Tamil Nadu government will be repeatedly challenged by several other fringe groups , who would be tempted to defy the law, thinking that the government will not stand by any principled approach to any issues and will compromise.

Of course, the ultimate losers are the common men who expect the rule of law would be maintained by the government and the government would give them protection from lawlessness. Already , we see a grave situation in Tamil Nadu today, where violence and murders have become the order of the day and the rowdy elements are increasingly becoming necessary segment of political parties . It is increasingly becoming difficult to distinguish between the politicians and the law breakers. Obviously, the law enforcement department in Tamil Nadu are unable to prevent such murders and violence which are increasing in number.

After this episode, common men may live with great fear about the law and order scenario and may think that the doors have to be kept closed and moving in isolated places and during night hours should be avoided to the extent possible. This can be the most undesirable condition for a law abiding common man.