Sathyaraj apologises: Baahubali 2 controversy shows Tamil cinema truly represents people
The recent demand for an apology from Tamil actor Sathyaraj by Karnataka-based activists for his alleged remarks against the state and its people made nine years ago on the eve of the release of his film is the latest in a growing list of public apologies coerced from actors.
The activists had made it abundantly clear that Baahubali 2: The Conclusion that releases next week wouldn’t be allowed exhibition in Karnataka if Sathyaraj, who portrays Kattappa in SS Rajamouli’s epic, didn’t apologise.
Intent
The fact that in the last nine years since Sathyaraj’s statement in 2008 when the Tamil film industry opposed Karnataka’s objection to the Hogenakkal drinking water project, over 20 films featuring the star have released in the same state didn’t seem to matter.
For all intent and purposes, the manner in which Sathyaraj was forced to apologise might resemble the way Karan Johar responded to the demands of Maharashtra Navnirman Sena (MNS) on the eve of the release of his Ae Dil Hai Mushkil.
But scratch a little and you’d see how the two are not only poles apart but also reveals how unlike Bollywood, the greater a star’s success in south Indian films and especially Tamil cinema, the closer they are to the ground realities of the people they claim to represent.
To the uninitiated Sathyaraj’s video apology would look the same as the one that Johar released to appease the strong-arm tactics of the MNS. Following the Uri attacks where Pakistan-based terrorists killed Indian soldiers in cold blood, there was a nation-wide outrage against carrying on with a ‘business as usual’ interaction with Pakistan.
Many felt that unlike Pakistani artists who refused to comment on the heinousness of the attack, Bollywood too should stand by its own countrymen and put an embargo on working with Pakistani actors till the situation changed.
The way the MNS arm-twisted Johar is appalling but many found the manner in which Johar batted for the likes of Fawad Khan, who featured in Ae Dil Hai Mushkil, revolting. While Johar might have felt terrible to sit in front of a camera and speak about his nationalism and patriotism, the fact remains that he felt more terrible about the manner in which he was torn between ideology and circum stance than anything else.
By contrast, even though Sathyaraj apologised for the hurt that his statements would have caused, he made his ideology stand apart from the circumstance.
Like Johar, Sathyaraj, too, expressed his regret that his actions were held against a movie that thousands of people put in a lot of hard and he was just “a small worker”, yet at the same time unlike Johar he warned future producers to stay away from casting him in their films if they did not want any trouble as he would continue to voice his opinion for the Tamil people. Sathyaraj’s statement that he is more proud to “live and die as a Tamilian rather than an actor” is the kind of stuff that separates Bollywood stars from Tamil or other south Indian stars.
Politics
Tamil cinema and its stars both behind and in front of the camera have been intrinsically related to politics right from the time of the freedom struggle to the days where Dravidian movement captured the imagination of the masses. It is hardly surprising that many of the political stalwarts in Tamil Nadu have emerged from the world of cinema.
In such a scenario, it is practically impossible for big stars to not take a stand and every time there has been a call to action for any Tamil cause almost every single star worth his/her salt has chosen pride over trade. In fact, in 2002 when questions were raised about Rajinikanth’s loyalty towards the state as he was born in Karnataka, the superstar famously sat on a hunger strike and contributed Rs 1 crore towards a river-linking project to resolve the Cauvery river water-sharing dispute between Karnataka and Tamil Nadu.
Irrespective of the difference in the manner leading stars across Hindi cinema and south Indian films, especially Tamil cinema, present themselves in public, the release of a film is the perfect time for all kinds of fringe outfits to demand their pound of flesh. It is the manner in which the Tamil industry responds as a unit is what makes it different from Bollywood. At a 2010 public gathering to felicitate the then chief minister, M Karunanidhi, actor Ajith openly said that actors shouldn’t be coerced to take political stands. Yet when the time comes where the cause of the state is in balance they know what to do. It is for this reason that to a great degree the industry’s demands are met by the state government, which ensures that there is almost zero piracy of new releases to help the industry grow (as this writer had noticed during a visit to Chennai a few years ago).
Reality
Compare that with Bollywood and you see how the bigger the star the further they appear to be from reality.
Unlike the Tamil film industry neither are they aligned with most issues concerning themselves nor are they on the same page with most of the common folks when it comes to bigger issues such as stance against Pakistan or national pride.
For Johar, the money riding on his film always seems to be the only focus; and for some like Anurag Kashyap the dynamics of the release of a film is brazenly comparable to the nation’s foreign policy. This is also an industry where one of its most respected talents, Anurag Kashyap says: “I am thankful to piracy because it saved cinema and my career.” He has even tweeted: “If you haven’t seen Masaan, better to download it on torrents or watch a pirated DVD than see it on hot star. It's mutilated on it.”
This author does not take responsibility for the veracity of what is reported in media, but if what is reported is true then it does appear that Bollywood, unlike Tamil cinema, appears to care about its own self more than anything.
(Courtesy: Mail Today)