While there is much of a buzz around the movie PK or PeeKay on both positive and negative counts, I feel there is a strong need to reflect upon a few things on the basis of what is being supposedly offered by the movie. The movie is definitely a darling of the masses for those who are of the firm opinion that religion is being used as a tool for propagating & perpetuating superstitions or foolish beliefs or even blind faith on God or Godmen, which is to be brought to the fore and an awareness is to be created in the minds of those people who are being acutely misled. Undoubtedly, that’s an opinion which goes uncontested with every sane human being, irrespective of one’s religious or cultural background.

But unfortunately or so, the shade of fractured neutrality or biased secularism exhibited these days by many self proclaimed saviours of freedom of speech & humanity, as well as the makers of the film does a lot of damage rather than undoing the so called earlier damage. Infact they have made a clear mismatch of context even though they have taken a lot of facts into account. Secondly, they failed to realize that they are presenting it to an audience that is not so very matured or seasoned enough. Had it been so, then let alone the question of understanding the movie, but such a movie won’t even be required in the first place.

The film makers also lose out in making any significant impact as the earlier blockbuster on a similar theme, “Oh my God” was flawless and has actually brought about the message with such finesse and detail while not hurting the sentiments of any religion or its followers. It also was a laugh riot but at the same time with crucial moments of exceptional brilliance whenever it took a serious turn. The film actually won the hearts of people across the board and contributed towards a real social change with people coming to terms with their superstitions and becoming aware of their blunders in the name of God or Religion or Worship. That’s what was expected from PK but this movie was more of an imposition seemingly with vested interests against a particular sect or faith.

To preach an audience that is already deeply divided on religious lines and kept instigated by vested interests for various deplorable reasons, such a piece of artwork, no matter however genuine or appreciable, wouldn’t make sense and would only further act as inflammatory than mitigating it. The reason being, they expect a class-V student to behave like a Doctorate holder or a learned scholar for that matter. You can’t lecture to someone on Charles’s & Boyle’s law, who has no means to even boil his water for cooking rice and has not even learnt A, B, C, D… from school.

But the evil that we confront in the name of religion or religious practices is larger and not restricted to what is reflected upon in the movie or perceived as religious beliefs alone. It has transgressed to inter-religious connotations and alarming proportions of communal misunderstanding & disharmony. Needless to say, the controversy surrounding forcible conversions & re-conversions from one religion to another is definitely not a good sign for unity to flourish.

In a country of our kind, people are definitely left to ponder that, why is it a curse in this country to be a majority and still be reduced to nothing in the name of an egalitarian society. While those same countries that advocate egalitarianism, have different set of rules when it comes to their majority or rules of homeland. And “mashallah” those countries with religious fanaticism don’t need a mention I guess. Its nauseating to see that its a no-holds-barred birth right in the name of freedom of expression for anyone from any corner of world, when it comes to denigrating Hindu beliefs or Gods or practices, whereas a slightest whimper against any other religion or belief, even if were to be against their wrongdoing, would tantamount to communalism & infringement of their religious rights or freedom of speech in this same country with repercussions across the globe.

So the message is loud and clear that, anyone can insult Hindus and their associated beliefs or traditions or gods and get away by stating that it’s their right to opinion and freedom of expression(The likes of MF Hussain paintings and other artists, film makers like Kamalhaasan amongst others are glaring examples of such misuse & bias). Just check out this fantastic speech by Sh.Venkaih Naidu in parliament that stands out so nicely in showing the level of prevalent injustice towards Hindus that even if they used the word Hindu, its considered communal or inciting hatred:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FpCd3jfZTCE

The earlier spill over I was talking about  “countries with religious fanaticism” is a thing of past now. The latest high point (or nadir) is “religious fanaticism in countries (almost every country in globe)” that’s calling the shots. The fault lines lay with the makers of PK not on the theme, but in the timing, method employed and to the category of audience they wanted to present. They tend to ignore the fact that these audience are with a limited vision & lack of exposure. Also their representation seemingly was, like targeting one particular section or community with a vested interest rather than targeting the purpose at hand to render a well intended message against a social evil at large.

They made a movie worth watching for audience of their calibre or intellect probably, but they failed to realize that those Ram & Shyam / David & Michael / Ahmed & Irfan / Kuljeet & Manjeet etc., are bound to misinterpret and carry a biased opinion either in one’s favour or against, as per their choices due to what they essentially are as an ingredient in this contemporary society.To show a line small, one doesn’t necessarily have to draw a big line by the side always, like what the so called great Kamalhaasan or Dravida Kazhagam people do in the name of their “pagutharivu” (wisdom). Because their preaching, predominantly, is not for a social cause but only reflect more of their deep rooted, vengeful, opinionated bigotry against merely one class or section of populace. Also to highlight someone’s flaw, one always need not take the route of ridicule alone, especially when the matter is sensitive in its own right. By doing so, they only stoop to the same levels of the very flaw itself which they wanted to address.

Above all the real application of one’s sincerity in making such an attempt is shown by being committed to neutrality of purpose. For instance, to write on the ill-effects of junk food, if you get into name calling then, you can’t just list out how harmful ghee parantha is or aloo tikki is but conveniently leave out by not making a mention of cheese pizza or burger or kebabs too. Because your mandate is to create awareness on junk food and not create dislike for aloo tikkis amongst masses.

The bottom line is we can’t build a skyscraper without first digging the ground in the opposite direction. The clue lies here. Address first things first. To teach someone to eat noodles with chopsticks one should first tell them how to hold it. When you are on a mission to bulldoze all rotten trees or dilapidated structures on government land obstructing a road you can’t pick and choose or discriminate between them because it is a temple or mosque, or because its a banyan tree or neem tree. That will only give credence to your pseudo secular and convoluted approach with ulterior motives and favouritism. Also given the scenario that is prevalent, such (pseudo) secularists should first dilute on their travesty before expecting modesty from the audience that they are catering to.

Thanks.
Ss.