The right of universal offense

I am merely OK with Kamal Haasan. He has given some extremely memorable films and some real duds. But, I have always liked the strength of his points of arguments, while both agreeing and disagreeing with his positions.

But, in the current brouhaha about Viswaroopam, he is skating on thin ice.

Why is he being so accommodative of “religious sensibilities”? You say, he is not? I say he is, for the simple fact that he is fighting his battle on the back foot. Why is he not asking the relevant question? Which is? I will come to it later.

Religious sensibilities are funny things. In many movies villains who commit unspeakable crimes are also shown as devotees of some God / Goddess or the other. And, heroes are also portrayed likewise. Then, if such movies are tolerated I must assume that insofar as the negatives are balanced by positives, the movie will pass religious muster. That is, religion is no more than a common balance, and not tuned all that precisely at that!

In what way such sensibilities command a premium over other sensibilities, like secular sensibilities, scientific sensibilities, aesthetic sensibilities or even atheistic sensibilities?

Is it the argument that religion can never be fictionalized? If yes, how can science be fictionalized? Movies such as Rajnikanth’s Endhiran assaulted my scientific sensibilities. I must have protested against its screening, but I missed my chance. The next time I will keep my eyes wide open.

What are your sensibilities that have been assaulted, and by which movies? Every movie caricatures police force. Why aren’t policemen lining up against each and every movie? What about politicians?

As far as I can remember, no hero or villain has been portrayed as a committed atheist. This has truly abused my atheistic sensibilities. I demand a dozen movies with atheist heroes dancing in the rain with chiffon clad atheist heroines and subduing atheist villains. Only then my sensibilities, ignored for this long, will be given the respect that is due them.

Coming to the relevant point – give me one good why reason religion cannot be questioned, cannot be threatened. I am not saying that Viswaroopam does any of these. All I am saying is even if it did, why should it not be screened?

Kamal Haasan, instead of basing his points on the cat’s paws of freedom of expression / artistic license etc. to pull out his professional-cum-financial interest chestnut out of fire, should have responded, “I am not sure the movie offends religious sensibilities, but if it did, so be it …” He is, indeed, well positioned to respond thus as he is a proclaimed non-religionist / rationalist / atheist, whatever. If he is not going on the offensive, I have to wonder why.

Obviously, his financial interests dissuade him from taking further logical steps in the direction of his convictions. If he were to say, “I do not worry about offending religious sensibilities,” he will be setting the stage for offending any and all religions in the future. He will risk taking on the spectrum-wide horde of religionists! That will be too much even for him to chew.

Then, I will be touching a raw nerve here – given this reality, would he have dared a similar, allegedly “insensitive” portrayal of the other religious communities? Please note that I am not asking for “balance” between the various religions, customs in his story lines, across all the movies he is making (which he anyway seems to have done in some measure – for example, in the Tamil version of Mrs. Doubtfire) in which case he would have achieved only an insipid, trivial balance. I am asking for him to be religious-neutral in going against this beast, “religious sensibilities”.

That is true balance, balance between and among all kinds of sensibilities, “As an artist, I am free to offend!” After all, what makes an artist great is having the courage to provoke and challenge, as Andrews S. Curran says in the context of Diderot. A right to offend universally, towards emancipation from received authority in the interest of common good!

This is what Richard Dawkins asks when he wonders why religious sensibilities enjoy this exalted position among all the other types of sensibilities, why this deference. Kamal Haasan heard the question but hid himself behind trivial truths. He failed truly coming out, just as Jodie Foster failed at the recent Grammy Awards function.

Raghuram Ekambaram