Friday, July 06, 2007

Democracy only in name

Anyone growing up in India gets used to the fact that it is a democracy that gives its people the right to express and associate themselves. It is a matter of pride for them. The real life drawbacks in its application within India, while demoralising, serves to remind us of the ideal.

So, I was surprised to read about the requirement for a political party in India to swear allegiance to the "principle" of socialism to be registered with the election commission. Without registration with the election commission, there is no chance of contesting elections and effectively, this shuts the door on the right to express oneself and associate with fellow citizens, freely.

Till 1989, the only economic system that I knew was socialism. The textbooks I used and teachers I had, extolled its virtues without a fair discussion of alternatives. So, to me, communism was a success and socialism would make India better (which usually meant, beat pakistan in cricket). And then, came the fall of berlin wall and dissolution of USSR. It shook my faith in what I was taught and provided me an abject lesson in the error of ingesting information without scepticism. Add to it, the currency crisis in 1991 that led to liberalization of indian economy, my disillusionment with socialism was well under way. I didnt know much about capitalism except what I read from business magazines. So, for a long time, I didnt particularly care what economic system was followed as long as I had some way of living a comfortable life. As time has passed, I have realized that socialism was a worthless bill of goods that should have been consigned to the dustbin of history a long time back (analogy mouthed by Kamal Hassan's character in Varumaiyin Niram Sikappu when hunting through a garbage dump). As is true about every indian divorced from the legal reality in India, I realize now I am completely out of step with respect to the indian constitution and its legal framework.

The preamble to the constitution of india is very clear.

"WE, THE PEOPLE OF INDIA, having solemnly resolved to constitute India into a SOVEREIGN SOCIALIST SECULAR DEMOCRATIC REPUBLIC and to
secure to all its citizens:
JUSTICE, social, economic and political;
LIBERTY of thought, expression, belief, faith and worship;
EQUALITY of status and of opportunity;
and to promote among them all
FRATERNITY assuring the dignity of the individual and the unity and integrity of the Nation;
IN OUR CONSTITUENT ASSEMBLY this twenty- sixth day of November, 1949,do HEREBY ADOPT, ENACT AND GIVE TO OURSELVES THIS CONSTITUTION."

Only on further reading, did I realize the words socialist, secular and unity and integrity of the Nation were inserted during the poisonous regime that infected indian democracy under Indira Gandhi. These changes were part of the infamous forty second amendment to the constitution. There were a whole host of changes as part of that amendment that cemented the socialist nature of the state. It is instructive to remember this amendment was passed during emergency. The amendment also placed directive principles of the state above fundamental rights of its citizens. The language in the amendment reflects the heady arrogance of unchecked state power as can be seen below.

"THE CONSTITUTION (FORTY-SECOND AMENDMENT) ACT, 1976
Statement of Objects and Reasons appended to the Constitution
(Forty-fourth Amendment) Bill, 1976 (Bill No. 91 of 1976) which was
enacted as THE CONSTITUTION (Forty-second Amendment) Act, 1976
STATEMENT OF OBJECTS AND REASONS
A Constitution to be living must be growing. If the impediments to
the growth of the Constitution are not removed, the Constitution will
suffer a virtual atrophy. The question of amending the Constitution
for removing the difficulties which have arisen in achieving the
objective of socio-economic revolution, which would end poverty and
ignorance and disease and inequality of opportunity
, has been engaging
the active attention of Government and the public for some years now.

3. It is, therefore, proposed to amend the Constitution to spell out
expressly the high ideals of socialism, secularism and the integrity
of the nation, to make the directive principles more comprehensive and
give them precedence over those fundamental rights which have been
allowed to be relied upon to frustrate socio-economic reforms for
implementing the directive principles
. It is also proposed to specify
the fundamental duties of the citizens and make special provisions for
dealing with anti-national activities, whether by individuals or
associations.
".

Only thing missing above is Indira taking out the portion on objective of socio-economic revolution, replacing it with 'garibi hatao'.

For all his faults, Nehru's intellect wouldnt have allowed him to exercise the unimaginable power his daughter exercised. There are unofficial claims about how Nehru wrote a letter, when he was prime minister, to the editor of a newspaper warning against giving too much power to himself. It also points to the difference between the Nehru and Indira. To my knowledge, Nehru was a socialist through and through but he didnt go so far as to enshrine it in the constitution even though he could have if he wanted to, in 1950. His daughter was far more petty in her exercise of political power and showed up socialism for what it was, an empty slogan that assured India was on its way to ruin. But then, Nehru lost the war with china while Indira won one against Pakistan. The aura of invincibility might have convinced Indira to go for it. It is also the first time the machinery of state is explicitly stated to be of greater importance than the people it is supposed to serve. It is an unfortunate legacy we still live with.

Some other 'gems' in our constitution that indirectly espouse socialist nature of the state include(from Directive principles of state policy):

Article 38 - State to secure a social order for the
promotion of welfare of the people.
- The State shall strive to promote the welfare of the
people by securing and protecting as effectively as it may
a social order in which justice, social, economic and
political, shall inform all the institutions of the
national life.
- The State shall, in particular, strive to minimise the
inequalities in income, and endeavour to eliminate inequalities in
status, facilities and opportunities, not only amongst individuals but
also amongst groups of people residing in different areas or
engaged in different vocations
.

Article 41 - Right to work, to education and to public assistance in certain
cases.
- The State shall, within the limits of its economic
capacity and development, make effective provision for securing the
right to work, to education and to public assistance in cases of
unemployment, old age, sickness and disablement, and in other cases of
undeserved want.

Article 43A - Participation of workers in management of industries.
- The State shall take steps, by suitable legislation
or in any other way, to secure the participation of workers in
the management of undertakings
, establishments or other
organisations engaged in any industry.

Article 43 - Living wage, etc., for workers.
- The State shall endeavour to secure, by suitable legislation or
economic organisation or in any other way, to all workers,
agricultural, industrial or otherwise, work, a living wage, conditions
of work ensuring a decent standard of life and full enjoyment of
leisure and social and cultural opportunities and, in particular, the
State shall endeavour to promote cottage
industries on an individual or co-operative basis
in rural
areas.

Article 47 - Duty of the State to raise the level of nutrition and the standard of
living and to improve public health.
- The State shall regard the raising of the level of nutrition and the
standard of living of its people and the improvement of public health
as among its primary duties and, in particular, the
State shall endeavour to bring about
prohibition of the consumption except for medicinal purposes
of intoxicating drinks and of drugs
which are injurious to
health.

Article 48 - Organisation of agriculture and animal husbandry.
- The State shall endeavour to organise
agriculture and animal husbandry
on modern and scientific
lines and shall, in particular, take steps for preserving and
improving the breeds, and prohibiting the slaughter, of
cows and calves and other milch and draught cattle
.

Article 51A - Fundamental Duties.
- It shall be the duty of every citizens of
India
- to strive towards excellence in all spheres of individual and
collective activity
so that the nation constantly
rises to higher levels of endeavour and achievement.

In addition to the constitution, the representation of people act of 1951 governs who can contest the elections in India. As part IVA - REGISTRATION OF POLITICAL PARTIES(Registration with the Election Commission of associations and bodies as political parties) states,

"The application under sub-section (1) shall be accompanied by a copy of the memorandum or rules and regulations of the association or body, by whatever name called, and such memorandum or rules and regulations shall contain a specific provision that the association or body shall bear true faith and allegiance to the Constitution of India as by law established, and to the principles of socialism, secularism and democracy, and would uphold the sovereignty, unity and integrity of India."

The above part seems to have been passed in 1989, based on references provided. I am not sure who pushed this through but given the "stellar" group of politicians we had at that time(V.P.Singh, Rajiv Gandhi, Advani et al), it isnt a surprise there wasnt any objections raised. The meltdown in foreign exchange reserves was still 2 years away.

The number of amendments to indian constitution also means it has become unwieldy. There is a good argument to be made that a party wishing to follow libertarian policies can sign the pledge to be socialist and maintain a schizophrenic existence. It only needs to worry about its identity the day indian voters understand what their rights are and get ready to demand it. However, it doesnt augur well for the democratic nature of indian polity that the constitution requires allegiance to a discredited economic system. While good arguments can be made for the other items in the list, socialism sticks out like a sore thumb. The current indian economy has moved away from socialism (mostly) and it would come as a surprise to the youth of India that their prosperity is assured by economic policies that bear no relation to what is enshrined in the constitution. A day might come when politicians would want to go back to socialism and the constitution would provide them with every justification to do that even if it means crushing the dreams of a bright future.

Tuesday, July 03, 2007

Bad architecture

I watched Sivaji over the weekend when it was screened in a theatre close to Ashburn. As someone who considers Rajnikanth to be a brilliant businessman with minimal acting ability, I went in with very low expectations. Add to that, it was being directed by Shankar who is very good at spending huge sums of money on his movies with very little to show for an effective story. The movie didnt even surpass the minimal expectations.

The movie opened with a short trailer for an animation movie
Sultan produced by Rajni's daughter. It once again goes to show how much of a good businessman he truly is. As he ages, the style elements he pioneers will not sit well on him(Even if it does, those who follow it will be a narrower segment). Switching to animation allows him to portray a limitless range of gimmickry and style leveraging his movie persona that is not possible for him in his advanced age in movies. The challenge from younger actors also means that Rajni has to pass the baton to someone else like MGR did in his day and animation would provide him a second lease of life away from snickering of general public that MGR encountered in his doddering years. I am wondering whether Kamal will be smart enough to understand the power of animation. Rajni has used animation within his movies before(Raja Chinna Roja) and shouldnt have difficulty tasting success given his fans include children. The lack of acting skills when compared to Kamal also makes it a great option for Rajni. It just might be that Sultan might beat Marudanayagam to the punch and Kamal might be left holding debts while Rajni (once again) reigns at the box office. The quality of the trailer was very good and I am looking forward to it.

Sivaji's Story:
Rajni plays a NRI(a system software architect given his target audience comprises of software engineers who grew up watching his movies back in India and are now spread all over the world ready to splurge on his movies) who returns to india with a boatload of money and a desire to 'give back to the country'. He proposes to open a one stop shop for educational and medical needs that doesnt charge people for its services. He runs head long into a power broker, played by an ineffectual Suman, whose business empire(and political clout) would be threatened if Rajni's plans take off. He falls in love with Shriya after seeing her at a local temple. Rajni jumps through innumerable bureaucratic hoops only to find his project stopped by political machinations. After losing all his possessions in the bargain, he vows to strike back at Suman and the corrupt political system. How he goes about it forms the rest of the story.

Analysis:
Shankar has built a production house out of successful movies that show one person fighting against the corrupt system (bureaucrats, businessmen and politicians) and generally winning the battle at the end. Movies like Ramana did a classier job in portraying one man's fight against the system while at the same time accepting the need for a support structure for the operation's success. I would have thought the presence of Rajni would preclude any reasonable presentation of the concept. I was right on that but surprisingly, that is more Shankar's fault than Rajni's. Overall, the movie makes for terrible viewing.

One staple of a Rajni movie for a long time has been sequences showing how he becomes rich in the course of one song(Annamalai, Padayappa). It would have been great if Shankar had given some thought to that portion. Instead, the route Rajni takes here has a whiny feel to it. The solution is something that will be welcomed by Rajni fans mainly because of a lack of healthy scepticism about their thalaivar. However, it flies in the face of what Shankar wants to convey in the film. The solution to the problem of unaccounted-for cash assets (a.k.a 'black money') that Rajni hits upon sounds acceptable to me only if I can consider Rajni's character to be exempt from moral considerations of right and wrong in the context of the movie. Shankar offers the wimpy way out of 'If his competitor(with support from the system) is doing something morally wrong, why not Rajni too ?'. Instead of rooting for the hero because of the undeniable feel good effect on seeing him getting his revenge(through becoming rich), I was left wondering, at the lack of differentiation between his character and Suman's except for them being slotted on opposite sides in the screenplay. Shankar's movies generally run on this tension in hero's portrayal(Indian 'thaatha' being upholder of rules who however has to break them to clean up the system, 'Ambi' in Anniyan being the righteous lawyer who breaks rules to implement innovative forms of torture from Garudapurana etc.). At least Anniyan had good justification('Ambi' suffering from multiple personality disorder was a very believable reason) for maintaining the tension. Sivaji or, for that matter, Indian has none. Shankar might have figured the popular base for Rajni and Kamal are blind enough to overlook the discrepancy and I think he has been proven right going by the reception of the two movies.

Usual Rajni characters start from lower economic strata in the society(generally content with their station in life) and end up far higher at the end of the movie, while bemoaning the sacrifices that come with single minded devotion to that journey. Prime example would be Annamalai or Nallavanukku Nallavan even though Padayappa had a variation on the theme(where he starts being rich, loses it all and comes back on top again). Sivaji is similar to Padayappa but has none of the verve of the latter(I hate Padayappa but am a fan of those songs in Rajni movies).Here, we have none of that. The focus in always on the larger goal of building colleges and hospitals but in so doing, Shankar also sacrifices the emotional identification with Rajni's character (from seeing him and his family struggle) his movies of past have leveraged. Some of Shankar's movies too, have precisely used the same imbalance to become big hits. Gentleman was a big hit precisely because it dealt with educational challenges for lower class whereas Sivaji deals with lower class people as peripheral characters in the story. It might signal a break in whom Rajni is targeting or it might just be temporary diversion from Shankar.

As he has become more successful, Shankar has constantly found new, outlandish ways to stage fights in his movies. Anniyan set a new standard in nonsensical fights just for the sole purpose of showing one. Sivaji follows the trend and the slowness of Rajni(with advancing age) made the fights a nightmare to get through, for me. Shankar has compensated by slowing down the frames at certain points in the fight but it still couldnt prevent me from pitying Rajnikanth's agility in the movie.

The romance portion was horrendous, to put it mildly. The fact that Rajni continues to play much younger roles than what his age demands has been rankling me for quite a long time. As much as Shankar tries to hide the age on Rajni through make up, it shows(except for the last 15 minutes. I am wondering why Shankar didnt use that get up for Rajni earlier in the movie). Shriya doesnt have to act that much and she doesnt even try.

The disturbing section of the romance portion was the open ridicule of darker skin(That tamils are recent masters at practicing colour discrimination might be one reason). Rajni has always referred to his skin colour in his movies, using the discrimination to his advantage. The heroines, in his movies, are generally fairer than him and he has used it to target his core audience of youth in tamilnadu(If someone as dark as me can get a fairer girl, you can too. You just have to learn to do cigarette(or with Sivaji, gum) flips.Learning to smoke it makes you cool too). Here, Shriya uses his colour as an ostensible reason for turning him down(which, given his prior movies, isnt a surprise). The portions where Rajni tries to turn himself white were mildly funny even though nowhere close to what he is capable of as a comedian. After that, what was intended as humour was sickening. That Solomon Pappaiah is roped to do this portion is even more despicable, given his general standing in tamilnadu as moderator of television debates and literary commentator. He is a neighbour to shriya and after she turns Rajnikanth down on account of his colour, he keeps offering his two daughters( younger than shriya and darker than Rajni) to Rajni who proceeds to turn them down, with the director leaving us in no doubt the rejection is because of their dark colour. The only message that was conveyed through that sequence was that darker you are, the lesser attraction and appeal you have(that is, if one can discount the horror of offering those young girls for marriage). To have it in a Rajni movie was even worse. This is an actor and personality who holds absolute sway over tamil movie fans who treat his movies as fit for family consumption. Audience in the theater were actually laughing at the sequence. This isnt some uncouth rural tamilnadu 'keeththu kottaai' patrons but moderately well heeled, supposedly well educated tamil expats. His prior movies have always used the darker shade of skin as positive reinforcement(for the most part). The perception of dark skin advocated in this movie is hurtful and unbelievably stupid that will add onto the negative consequences of being dark in tamilnadu for some time to come(Not that, it already isnt a big issue with tamil culture).

*******Spoiler alert - Dont read if you dont want to know plot twists and turns**************

The electric shock sequence in jail which leads to Rajni's escape is juvenile and incomprehensible. Does he know how much electric current is enough to still his heart without completely stopping it ? Plus the movie doesnt specify a time frame within which the switch happens so how does one know CPR will even work ?. While Shankar gives a clue in earlier portions of the movie(where the kid at the construction site gets saved by CPR) as to where Rajni's character gets the idea from, to use it as a plot point without reasonable devotion to the preparation, shows Shankar's laziness.

Rajni has targeted two of the most successful icons of tamil moviedom and co-opted their brands into his image. The movie name is the namesake of Sivaji and the character at the end of the movie takes on the name of M.G.Ravichandran with someone even claiming the name is actually MGR. He has sequences in the movie where he acts out Sivaji in Mayakkam Enna and MGR in Azhagiya Tamil Magal Eval songs. Just as the younger crop of heroes like Dhanush use Rajni's image to bolster their fan base.

As someone who has CPR training(but has let the certification elapse), I was glad that they highlighted its effectiveness. A Rajni movie is a far better vehicle to create awareness of CPR in tamilnadu than a dedicated government program run by bureaucrats with no idea as to how to portray it. Shankar follows up the discussion of multiple personality disorder in Anniyan with CPR here. At least for his effort in creating awareness, he should be commended.

Shankar showed that he is good if he is left to his own devices instead of directing an actor with larger than life image. The sequences in the jail leading to the climax were very well executed and would have been even better if not for the obvious compromises Shankar makes for Rajni, the superstar.

Performers:

Rajni looks good in his role once I accepted the unbelievable premises behind it. He has tried to look a lot younger than what he actually is but the age does show in other ways, in his body movements and the one and a half chin(there wasnt quite a double chin). The punch lines were definitely delivered well.

Suman was the wrong choice for the villain role. If Shankar wanted to convey a certain calmness and menace in Suman by making him wear sunglasses all the time, it just made him look out of place. Even the guy who played the inspector(who also played Peikkaaman in Virumaandi) would have done much better in Suman's place.

I had high expectations for Vivek but he was good only in patches. Some of his jokes were just statements of the obvious that fell flat in delivery. It might be that Vivek made a conscious decision to downplay comedy so as not to overshadow Rajnikanth. So, he gets to shower Rajnikanth with praises which, to me, sounded not much different from what ADMK does to JJ.

Shriya performed her role of dumb tamil heroine character well. She doesnt have to do anything other than being eye candy for a much older hero and she does what is expected of her.

Conclusion:

Befitting their thalaivar's priorities(money first, performance later), the people who screened the movie charged $15 for admission which I was willing to pay as I figured I was due for a Rajni induced torture, 3 years after Baba. In comparison to Baba, Sivaji was much better but that isnt saying much. The movie was long but towards the end, it started looking like an OK tamil movie after having been in the gutter for most of the time. Shankar's production house comes out with very good movies like Kaadhal, Veyyil and 23aam Pulikesi. Sivaji is a blot on its track record even though the collections of the movie will top all the other three put together.