SPECIALS
INTERVIEWS
CAPITAL BUZZ
REDIFF POLL
DEAR REDIFF
THE STATES
YEH HAI INDIA
ARCHIVES

Humpty Dumpty was pushed

By now, no way you can't have heard about the Shaktimaan uproar. Since December, this desi Superman-clone kiddy serial, produced by Mukesh Khanna and telecast by Doordarshan, has regularly been featuring on the front pages. I've nurtured an Opinion about it since long, but I'd sort of hoped it would go away and cede precious newsprint to more authentic events -- like the gangrape of the Orissa nun. Alas, Shaktimaan refuses to oblige. So I've no choice but to Opine. And draw upon me the fury of doting parenthood...

Let me tell you what Shaktimaan's like. He is, well, Bheeshm Pitashree in carnival drag. The Clark Kent persona is even worse: picture, if you can, a cross between Shakti Kapur at his simpleton-worst and Anari's Raj Kapoor -- along with a lisp. And that is the least grotesque part of the serial... The superhero's specialty is to save children in distress; week after week, he responds to cries of "Shaktimaan hamen bachao," and via the usual set of daredevilry, rescues kids from sundry ghastly fates.

Pretty innocuous, no? Non. For suddenly, there sprang a heated debate on whether the serial should, in the Great Indian Tradition, be banned. It seems, two kids broke their bones in an attempt to imitate Shaktimaan's deeds, and some also took flying leaps off rooftops. And then, from Begusarai district of Bihar, came the report that two kids set themselves ablaze in the belief that Shaktimaan would descend from the heavens and rescue them. One of the boys was discharged after first aid; the other suffered 80% burns and is still hospitalised. Bihar... Bodhisatva land...

So OK, I let it go. But that got increasingly difficult: Khanna is now the first television producer to have hired private sleuths to clear accusations against a serial. He hired the Globe Detective Agency to validate the veracity of news reports that many children died after being influenced by Shaktimaan. And the agency discovered that most of the reports were either fabricated or half-true. For instance, about an incident in Jaipur, where the agency discovered that a supposedly Shaktimaan-affected child had been injured during normal play, Khanna said, "After three days, a man in a white kurta came to the hospital and asked the child's family to say that it was because of Shaktimaan's influence that the child was hurt." Khanna, who's affiliated to the BJP and runs a popular campaign against tobacco-chewing by children, says, "There may be three parties [plotting against me]: My political rivals, rival television producers, or the Gutkha lobby."

So OK, I still let it go; it was just another cabal, me thought. But then, the newspapers bloomed with social worry-dom -- on ads and promos containing "an overdose of violence"; children suffering from "increasing bouts of behavioural disorders that doctors attribute directly to television viewing"; a Mumbai hospital's statistics indicating that "23% of kids engaged in violence, 39% felt unhappy, 9% felt angry and another 56% got frightening dreams after watching horror and violence-related serials." I couldn't believe my eyes. Political Correctness was shifting focus from hurt minorities to other areas, HELP!!!

At last count, the Prasar Bharati issued a notice for taking Shaktimaan off the air within the month; Khanna moved the Delhi high court seeking an interim order for its continuation; and the court summoned Doordarshan to appear before it on March 11. On the same day, UNI is also to plead against a defamation suit for publishing incorrect items about the effects of the programme...

So OK, I still let it go... Till a ToI editorial stated: "Surprisingly, even as children are losing their lives, the government remains unconcerned about the phenomenon of imitation violence."

That was it! I had to Opine. For my grouse is an old, considered one...

In April 1996, six-year-old Rinku Farooqui of Lucknow jumped head first off the balcony of his second-floor flat and died instantly. The boy had often told his father of wanting to imitate the bungee leap of the model in a Thums Up ad -- which danger signal his parents had ignored. After the usual coterie of PC groups took up the "fatal ad" issue, the soft-drink manufacturer withdrew the ad. I'd thought: just because one daft child decided to free-fall, how can the ad be blamed for violating the code of ethics? (Actually, its real flaw lay in suggesting that thirst for a cola could inspire the feat. Anyone who'd bungee off a cliff for anything less than a bottle of vodka, should be forced to take the plunge without the rope, if you ask me.)

There've always been such incidents, fired by the unlikeliest of stimuli, in every corner of the world. For instance, in 1991, a six-year-old in Calcutta died believing he could scale down his building a là Spiderman. In the seventies, a Hong Kong boy was so impressed by Superman, The Movie that he donned a red bedsheet and flew off into the Great Beyond, never to return. And in Cremona, Italy, three-year-old Massimo launched himself from the window in imitation of his favourite toon, Bugs Bunny (luckily, he survived the short drop).

I don't get it. How can the staggering imbecility of the dear departed/injured children be the fault of comic book characters...? But, although there's no end to what some kids may find inspiring, the fervour of the PC police is even more infinite! What's this "even as children are losing their lives"? How many, exactly? And have they been drafted towards Siachen, for chrissakes?! Why should all viewers be penalised for the cerebral feebleness of some? This PC business is nothing but a result of the foul mixture of cultural chauvinism, racial/religious appeasement and the need to find scapegoats for the singular stupidity displayed by stray cases. After all, a battalion of moppets don't start bouncing out of windows after watching Flash Gordon, do they?

(Point to ponder: Why haven't there been instances of little girls mimicking the skills of Wonder Woman, Supergirl or Daisy Duck...? Makes one think... Anyway.)

I'm sorry, I can't help my insensitive stance. For it's rooted in a childhood trauma: One sad day, I was told that my tattered old Golliwog couldn't be replaced since he had been named a symbol of racial inequity and thus pulled off the shelves. I spent too many lonely nights crying and cursing unknown dweebs (also, I hadn't known that ALL nocturnal cuddlies equal trouble). It seems that African Americans (no longer black or coloured), saw Golliwog as a racial slur. It didn't matter that generations of white, brown and yellow ingenues loved the ragdoll for what it was -- giving no thought to its colour. Which is what everybody wanted, to begin with!

However, the best tale politicising toys comes from -- where else? -- Iran. The land of the fatwa dubbed Barbie the "Satanic Doll." The invasion of the swimming-costumed plastic babe sparked off an alarm comparable to that raised by The Satanic Verses: The Iranian brand of Islamically Correct held that "the unwholesome flexibility of these dolls, their destructive beauty and their semi-nudity have an effect on the minds and morality of young children." Er... please may I know, what flexibility, exactly? Can you blame me for picturing a bunch of ayatollahs putting the Stacked One to the test...? Quite mind-boggling.

But do not think that only Islam is prone to dementia. Americans are worse (closely followed by Husain-battling Hindutvawadis). In the US, PC police have their own anti-Barbie agenda: her fabulous figure is said to be unrealistic (although even a fleeting look at Baywatch proves otherwise), and blamed for inciting unformed minds to aspire to impossibly nipped-in waists and sleek thighs: Ideally, girls should feel that going through life like Dom De Luis is advantageous... The popularity of Barbie has also been linked to anorexia nervosa and bulimia, these disorders having zip to do with peer pressure and intrafamily stress...

In April 1996, Kuwait City witnessed the plight of the (Pakistani) editor of Arab Times being chased around the newspaper building by a gun-waving Arab. The assailant had been driven to violence by a comic strip of Hagar the Horrible, which depicted Hagar saying, "I pray and pray, but you never answer me", and God's voice replying, "Sorry if you don't get through right away. Keep trying. These days everyone wants to talk to me."

No, the feeble joke didn't make me grin, but, though certainly not among the better efforts from the creators of Hagar, I still couldn't discern wherein the sacrilege lay... That is, till Kuwait's Al-Mujtama magazine cleared the clouds engulfing my blasphemy-prone brains: "The cartoon was mocking God and communication between humans and their God." Hmm... quite an enigma, in'nit? I could say that Humour is a concept alien to the PC mindset, but I'm just too tired of saying it.

In 1995, we saw Tintin, Captain Haddock and even Snowy the pooch in the PC docks. Bertrand Boulin, in his book Tintin et I'Alcool, accused the late Herge of advertising the habit of alcohol consumption. Fortunately, by printing without permission several frames showing the characters in various stages of inebriation, Mr Boulin had broken copyright laws. And thus, his radical thesis was barred from sale, and the movement against the 67-year-old oeuvre halted.

But why wonder at poor Tintin's predicament when even Enid Blyton has been accused of racism, sexism, insensitivity towards minority groups -- along with having her creations tampered with? Golliwog was banished from Noddy's Toytown (to avoid offending bla... African Americans); Big Ears became White Beard (to protect the sensitivities of, swear upon God, those with oversized ears); and gypsies were turned to "travellers". Even the relationship between The Famous Five was deemed to be an unhealthy, sexist power struggle.

And so it's been going on: The "insufficiently career-conscious" Blondie (of the Dagwood strip) became self-employed. The fleshy, maternal Aunt Jemima of maplesyrup cans gained an Oprah look. Alas, no more does James Bond rakishly tug at a zip. All under the protective eyes of PC's, feminazis, and victims of social inequities..

No, honestly, when I think of all these "victims," I see the truth in Aldous Huxley's line: "It takes two to make a murder. There are born victims -- born to have their throats cut." For, very honestly, if I issue from my loins a child who believes it's safe to leap off rooftops -- I'd happily give him the final push. There must be nothing worse than the knowledge that one's responsible for putting an idiot on Earth.

Hmm... If anybody asks you what you think of this column, you'd probably say, "I think she goes too far! I think she should stop shooting off her mouth on children and using four-letter words, and cover important issues soberly!"

You make a very strong point.

Let me respond by saying this: Liar liar, pants on fire. You don't want a Shourie clone! You love to read "BALLS!" Everybody does! For this reason, we here in journalism are urging everybody to heed the small-print on the home page: "Before you read anything, wash it with soap." Thank you.

How Readers react to Varsha Bhosle's recent columns

Varsha Bhosle