Of disturbed minds...

The fragility of our freedom of speech and expression stands exposed every now and then. Most of us in our ordinary lives do not need (choose?) to test the limits of this freedom. Indeed, when the opportunity doesn’t arise for us to expand its boundaries or raise the pitch, we are secure in the imagination of its theoretical existence. Perhaps the insecurity is not entirely misplaced. But some feel the chains when they choose to move their limbs. And you hear faint whispers of voices struggling to be heard. It is mostly the ‘State’ that is perceived as the entity muting or muffling these voices. This is usually done rightly or wrongly in the name of reasonable restrictions of that freedom of speech. Just by way on info, as far as India is concerned, both- the freedom and its restriction- find their articulation and fountainhead in the Indian Constitution. Unfortunately, and as if the State was not enough, the domain of quelling voices has expanded and lent itself to even those outside the definition of ‘State’. Case in point- a recent film called Parzania by Rahul Dholakia. It is based on a true-life story of a 10 year old boy from a Parsi family missing since the Gujarat riots in 2002. The family still awaits any news of him. They hoped that people in Gujarat might see this film and have some news to offer. They hoped that the whole of Gujarat did actually see it. They are hoping still. The film is not being shown in Gujarat. People feared that Parzania carried the potential to cause communal disturbances. That it may be showing Gujarat in a false light. That more riots may follow. That at the very least, cinema theatres showing it may be targeted. That the pyromaniacs with the hobby of burning posters may not stop at just that. Theatres owners felt the heat before the fire. But what if they were offered security from the government? Well, the government could not avoid the riots in 2002. On the contrary there is evidence to argue they were silent partners-in-crime or even active perpetrators during the riots. And so it came to pass. Parzania- not in Gujarat. This is not the first instance of invisible chains on people’s freedom of speech and expression. Not in Gujarat in any case. Many films were taken off from cinemas in the past. Aamir Khan, for example, paid for going public with his ideas on the Narmada dam displacing villagers. Gujaratis said yes to the dam and no to his movies. His posters were burnt and films had to be taken off from all over the State. The government did not ban Parzania. The people did. For films disturb them. But reality does not.