Authors and writers like Shobhaa De are a great asset to any country. Irrespective of the philosophy they propagate in their authorship, the way they are able to successfully articulate a premeditated rationale with proxy reasoning is very appreciative. Most of us have watched the splendid film namely ‘Bhahubali’, it was a great change from the uninteresting films Bollywood is producing. ‘Bhahubali’ was for many a fantastic film produced by Southern Indian directors and unlike the ‘filthy’ movies produced by Hindi cinema; Bhahubali proved a 500 crore + movies can be produced outside of Bollywood.

Unfortunately for prominent writer Shobhaa De, the experience of watching ‘Bhahubali’ was full of disappointments. Shobhaa De describes ‘Bhahubali’ as sexist, racists – an opinion which reflects the culture of un-appreciating creativity of Non- Bollywood based directors and racial outlook for southern Indian film industry themes. The author envisions Bhahubali (the actor) bravery as ‘sexist’ and colour of villain as ‘racists’ as a proxy to her biasedness for southern film industry. – Is this analysis of Shobhaa De opinion true?

For our alternate analysis, we simulate a mini movie, imagine a little girl namely ‘Baby Mary’ who since childhood is habituated and saturated of the fact that only ‘Khans of Bollywood’  can produce a 500 Crore movie. Baby Mary grows up in such a filmy landscape and develops an ideology where if a movie needs to succeed (100 Cr – 500 Cr), it must have some basic eligibility –it should have its hero as ‘Khan’, produced by some ’Bhaijaan’  and must contain some key scenes where core Hindu traditions, beliefs saints and seers are disrespected.  

Unfortunately for Baby Mary, Bhahubali was an utter disappointment, as it lacked her expected basic eligibility. Baby Mary was shocked to witness a 500+ Cr film where Hindu God and associated traditions are treated with dignity (when the hero lifts Shiva Lingam and song to all powerful Shiva is sung) and where almost all of the directors, producers and actors are Hindus!! Where one don’t see an insult to Hindu gods and goddess, instead where an incarnation of ‘Kuldevi’ – Hindu goddess ‘Durga’ is worshipped with pride by ruling kingdom.

Now Baby Mary, who is a prominent socialite and author, is obliged to prove her affiliation to such an Anti-Hindu ecosystem that controls media, films and majority politics in India. In such an Anti-Hindu ecosystem which pervades current Indian film industry, one needs to be persistent in proving his credentials of loyalty to Anti-Hindu ecosystem (It’s just like a chartered accountant who has to renew his licence for practice).  Only then his articles (in case of an author) are published on ecosystem media, invitation to Page-3 glamorous parties, etc. privileges which Baby Mary yearns for. Baby Mary somehow needs to criticize ‘Bhahubali’ to upgrade her loyalty credentials to Anti-Hindu ecosystem Gurus and Baby Mary can’t disclose true reasons too for her negative assessment. Thus she deploys mass appeal terms ‘Racist’ and ‘Sexist’ to disapprove ‘Bhahubali’ as a proxy rationale.

Coming back to Shobaa De, in her end note she writes “The man who stole my heart was not Baahubali – but his loyal slave Kattappa”.

The note reminds me of Baby Mary who is brought up in an Anti-Hindu eco culture of treachery – where honest, brave, patriotic man like ‘Baahubali’ (an attribute of Hindu culture of frontline wars) are disliked and disingenuous impostors like Kattappa (an Abrahamic attribute of a disloyal slave who stabbed valiant Hindu king Baahubali from back and killed him) is cherished and loved in today’s contemporary culture of Bollywood & eco system.

The author leaves it to the readers to contemplate whether Shobaa De evaluation of ‘Bhahubali’ was ‘biasness for southern Indian film industry’ or ‘her credentials upgrade’ to Anti-Hindu eco system membership.

Reference:

‘Baahubali’: Racist, Sexist and Utterly Unmissable

http://www.ndtv.com/opinion/baahubali-racist-sexist-and-utterly-unmissable-784514

Source: WHN Media Network