What Pakistan meant to me … What it means now

What Pakistan meant to me … What it means now

Nidhi Shendurnikar Tere on the transformation that happened through research

As a nationalist, patriotic and proud Indian; Pakistan hardly figured in my list of concerns a few years ago. I neither despised it, nor was curious about it. The only time I thought about Pakistan was during an India-Pakistan confrontation on the cricket field. I rooted for the Indian cricket team, prayed for its victory (even paid visits to the nearby temple) and suffered dejection in the case of an Indian loss against Pakistan. To me, at that point of time, nothing was more humiliating than India losing in a cricket match against Pakistan (a victory of course meant jubilation!). Having thought of Pakistan as an arch enemy, cricket was nothing less than war and losing to Pakistan unacceptable to me and others of my age. The only other reference to Pakistan was through news about bomb blasts and terror attacks in India which left me perplexed as I began associating Pakistan with terrorism, chaos, anarchy and everything that was anti-India. Too naïve to explore anything beyond the mainstream discourse, my idea of Pakistan remained limited and heavily skewed.

Come 2011 and it changed. The change though was a gradual process even without my knowing. I was set for a PhD in Political Science and was mulling over my topic of research. Post many brainstorming sessions with my to be supervisor, we decided to work on an issue related to South Asia (which is also his area of specialization). This is how I started working on India-Pakistan relations and the Media’s role. Initially, though I remained skeptical about the entire project. Researching on India-Pakistan was not easy, it was considered to be controversial and even my parents were left wondering about my choice of topic. To this day, a mention of India-Pakistan manages to raise eyebrows; some question the utility of carrying out such a research, some advise caution, some consider me brave, some express outright displeasure and some others remain unperturbed.

Soon enough the nitty gritties of the research process required me to undertake a thorough study of the confrontational past of the relationship. I also realized that without interacting with Pakistanis my research could turn out to be one-sided and of no consequence. My quest for the archives of Pakistani newspapers took me to Delhi and Chandigarh and I began looking for Pakistani people who could help me in the process. I first chanced upon Rehman Ilyas (Founder - Romancing the Border), interacted with him and ended up contributing a piece on Indo-Pak friendship as a testimonial ('Let us be friends who respect each other's differences’, 2012). Not aware that this was the beginning of a transformative journey, I befriended many Pakistanis on Facebook and networked with them. This opened a new window frame for me. The interactions swelled, friendships developed and these positively affected my attitudes and perceptions of Pakistan. I realized there was much more to Pakistan – a side undiscovered and ignored by the popular political and media discourse in my country.

The Pakistan that I had not known was introduced to me to by my Pakistani friends. A Pakistan with breath-taking natural landscapes, a Pakistan where people lived with dreams and aspirations similar to that of Indians, a Pakistan with striking resemblances in culture, food, festivals, music; a Pakistan whose young citizens valued education, progress, development as much as Indians do; a Pakistan where citizens condemned violence, terrorism as much as Indians did and a Pakistan that did not hate India but looked up to the values upholded by Indian democracy and secularism. It was indeed a different Pakistan that I discovered through a string of interactions where I found Pakistanis to be warm, caring, reciprocative and more than willing to discuss various issues related to my research. As I began writing more and more on Indo-Pak issues, I discovered many peace-building groups on social media (Aman ki Asha, Aaghaz-e-Dosti, Romancing the Border, Friendships Across Borders: Aao Dosti Karein) and in the beginning of this year got selected for a yearlong Peace building initiative (Building Peace Project 2014-15 by The Red Elephant Foundation).

Much has changed in the span of three and a half years of this research – a deep intellectual engagement with people from across the border made this possible. So far I had heard tales of friendships narrated by my teachers with friends in Pakistan. Now I have my own stories to tell. A perspective that was amiss earlier was gifted to me through the process of research. This year may witness the culmination of my research (hopefully); however the process, the journey and the friendships will stay on forever. I have always believed in the transformative and healing power of research – that as a researcher one has to successfully imbibe within oneself.  The short term goal of engaging in a research project is to derive conclusions by seeking answers to certain questions; the long term goal however is to offer a more holistic and comprehensive perspective. A life changing vision is what this research has left me with.  At this point of time, it feels difficult to describe and explain what I encountered within the boundaries of terms like ‘methods’, ‘hypothesis’, ‘conclusions’. To confine it within the boundary of a 250 page thesis is certainly a task that I feel less prepared for. Can friendships be ever bounded into page limits, chapters and conclusions? Today, I strongly believe and wish to reinforce that I cannot let love for my own nation be construed, limited and narrowly bracketed into hatred and antagonism for the ‘other’. It is research that brought me to peace-building and I hope to stay ingrained in it forever.

The author is a Political Science doctoral candidate at The Maharaja Sayajirao University of Baroda, Gujarat, and a research fellow of the University Grants Commission working on India-Pakistan Conflict Mediation and Role of Media. She firmly believes in and endorses the power of research to positively transform hardened, stereotypical and nationalistic attitudes.  

Partition through the Cinematic lens - II

The story of a shattered family 

Garam Hawa (Scorching Winds) – 1973

Director: M.S. Sathyu

Cast: Balraj Sahni ( Salim Mirza ); Gita Shauhat Kaifi ( Amina Mirza ); Jalal Agha ( Shamshad ); Dinanath Zutski ( Halim ); Badar Begum ( Salim's mother); Abu Siwani ( Baqar Mirza ); Faroukh Shaikh ( Sikander Mizra ); Jamal Hashmi ( Kazim ).

Based on an unpublished story by Ismat Chugtai

A departing train, people moving to the land of the ‘other’ and families parting with their loved ones. Garam Hawa (1973) begins with Salim Mirza (Balraj Sahni) dropping his elder sister at the railway station to catch a train that will take her to Pakistan. It is the post-partition era during which hordes of Indian Muslims left their homeland to be a part of the newly created state of Pakistan. The Partition of undivided India, which led to the existence of Pakistan, haunts the national memories of both Indians and Pakistanis to this day. It was a complex event which has to be understood from many perspectives. To the viewer of this tragedy, Garam Hawa offers a humane take on the pain and agony of having to leave one’s homeland. Partition Cinema especially in mainstream Hindi films has undertaken a very violent view of the event. The process of the division of India has been depicted as full of violence and massacres of ordinary people from both sides of the border. While there is no denying this portrayal, cinema has failed to sketch the Partition as one which forced emotional turmoil on people, thereby playing havoc with their identities and national loyalties. Garam Hawa is credited with bringing in this face of the Partition to the forefront. 

The film is a telling commentary on the journey of Salim Mirza who is a successful shoe-maker facing the aftermath of Partition only because he is an Indian Muslim. Mirza is a firm believer in secular ideals, not willing to desert his homeland even as most of his relatives choose to flee to Pakistan since they see it as the land of opportunities for the Muslim community. The film poignantly tells the story of the belief, commitment and loyalty of Mirza towards the Indian State. As communal violence shatters the country and Muslims begin to believe that there is nothing that the Indian State can give them, Mirza places his trust on the secular fabric which was the foundation stone of India’s creation which distinguished itself from the theocratic basis of Pakistan. 

The partition was not only about violence and killings; it was also essentially about human suffering, displacement, loss of homeland, loss of identity and a constant struggle over national loyalties. It is very deftly that Garam Hawa examines such intricate issues. The politics behind the partition carried out by the Britishers as well as the State did not account for those Muslims who chose to stay back in India. It impacted their life, their trade and their relations with the majority community. Mirza’s trade prospects diminish as he fails to procure a bank loan. He suffers heavy financial losses and is forced to leave his ancestral home which is taken over by the state. Even at this point of despair and gloom, he is an eternal optimist who believes that the fighting and destruction in his ‘home’ is going to end one day. The ‘home’ for him, is the nation and he expresses his grief over the communal fights that are going on in the country. He believes in Gandhi’s sacrifice for the nation and says that it will not go down the drain. 

There are many scenes in the film which depict what the Partition meant to ordinary people. For eg: Mirza’s grandson, a five year old child is curious to know if he will be able to fly kites in Pakistan? Each time there is a letter from some relatives in Pakistan; Mirza’s wife curiously wants to know how things are in the land of the ‘other’. Mirza’s daughter Amina is twice deserted by her prospective suitors who flee to Pakistan while promising to come back to marry her. This never happens. The question that the characters in the film keep engaging with is why they should leave their country. This relates the question to that of identity. Is the Indian Muslim not Indian enough? Does he have to repeatedly prove his loyalty to the nation-state? Can he not lead a flourishing life in the Indian state? These and other such disturbing questions are raised in the film. The members of Mirza’s family are attached to their conception of being ‘Hindustani’ and they do not wish to leave it at any cost. Yet they are compelled to do so. Mirza’s ailing grandmother and his qualified but unemployed son are mirrors of hope which Indian Muslims during the Partition kept alive. While the ailing grandmother is unwilling to leave her ‘haveli’, his unemployed son chooses not to go to Pakistan for a job. 

Was the Partition really a decision taken in the interest of people as it was claimed to be? It was a perfect example of a few elites deciding about the lives of millions consequently uprooting them. Did Indian really achieve freedom at the dawn of August 15, 1947? This new found freedom had given rise to the menace of corruption and unemployment. Was such a freedom desirable? 

In every aspect, Garam Hawa shows that the state intervenes in human life. It is the state which decides upon the division of borders and it is the state which separates two people in love because one is Indian and the other Pakistani. These identities matter to the state, not to individuals who want to merely lead a life of dignity. The Indian state was created on a secular ideology, guaranteeing a respectable life to people of all faiths, religions and castes. Why does then the Indian state fail to intervene and instead accuse Mirza of being a Pakistani spy? When Mirza moves out to search for a makeshift home, he is refused shelter because he is a Muslim. His son is advised to go to Pakistan for a job because India cannot offer anything to him. The state distrusts the Muslim at a time when they have lost not only their property but also their dignity. Mirza fails to understand why he is punished for being a Muslim. This can be very well related to contemporary alienation of Muslims across the globe especially after attacks on the World Trade Center on 9/11. Even in the case of Amina, her marital fate is left at the mercy of the state. In the end, she commits suicide out of desperation. It is the individual’s pain that is the focus of Garam Hawa. 

Garam Hawa was the first feature from director M.S. (Mysore Shrivinas) Sathyu. The film was controversial from its inception, as it was the first film to deal with the human consequences resulting from the 1947 partition of India. Based on an unpublished story by Marxist activist Ismat Chughtai, the film won the National Award for its contribution to the cause of ‘national integration’. It made an attempt to humanize the situation endured by Muslims in North India who did not wish to move from their homes after the partition. (Kinsey). Garam Hawa’s portrayal of the partition trauma is remembered in the same breath as the representation of the Jewish Holocaust by Schindler’s List (1993). The reason why the film should be of interest to those who wish to explore Partition based cinema is because it shifts the focus of the event from violence to subtle suffering that was forced upon ordinary human beings (Bordoloi, 2012). This is precisely the reason why I have chosen to review this film. Present day partition based Hindi films rely heavily on jingoism, dramatization of the war spectacle, nationalism, loud and heroic dialogues and scenes and portraying Pakistan as the ‘other’. They reduce the partition to a bitter memory of violence which people have not been able to erase and how they still guided by the events of 1947 in their view of Pakistan. Most notable are films like Gadar (2001), Border (1997), Upkar (1965), Maachis (1996), Sarfarosh (1999), LOC Kargil (2003) and others. Hindi cinema’s static depiction of India-Pakistan relations is very stale when compared to the refreshing treatment provided by M.S.Sathyu. Garam Hawa is minus the nationalism, jingoism and dramatic treatment that characterize India-Pakistan films. Mirza is not the only one who is being asked to leave his homeland. There were millions of Mirzas in India as well as in Pakistan where countless Hindus and Sikhs were displaced and rendered homeless. Thus, Garam Hawa is thus the story of human life and resilience brilliantly enacted by Balraj Sahni and other actors in the cast. 

Unlike the negativity which has been illustrated in many partition based films, this creation is full of optimism and hope not only on part of the main characters but of his family members who stay with him and support him till the very end – his wife and his younger son. In the last sequence of the film, Mirza has given up all his hope and decides that India is not the place for him to stay. He packs his bags along with his son and wife. Having lost most of family to the division of the country, he is now certain that he does not want to lose the remaining loved ones. He regrets being a refugee in his own country. As he is all set to leave the country, he sees a crowd of people protesting against inefficient governance, corruption and unemployment. He decides to join the crowed with his son and sends his wife back home. He decides to stay back thus justifying his eternal optimism. 

Garam Hawa questions the position of the ‘other’. Who is the ‘other’ and how has he becomes one? How one becomes the ‘other’ in one’s own land? It addresses the position of all kinds of ‘others’ – the subaltern, the marginalized, the displaced, the poor or anybody who is refused his rights in his homeland. It is a moving documentation of the suffering of a family seen through the lens of the most significant event in the history of India-Pakistan relations – the Partition. 

Partition through the Cinematic lens - I

Revisiting wounded souls in Pinjar 
Pinjar (The Skeleton) – 2003

Director: Chandra Prakash Dwivedi

Cast: Urmila Matondkar (Puro/Hamida), Manoj Bajpai (Rashid), Sanjay Suri (Ramchand), Kulbhushan Kharbanda (Mohanlal), Lillete Dubey (Mrs. Mohanlal), Sandali Sinha (Lajjo), Isha Koppikar (Rajjo), Priyanshu Chatterjee (Trilok)
Based on Amrita Pritam’s Punjabi novel “PINJAR”

Violent bloodbath, massacres of scores of human beings and refugee exodus were the most powerful symbols of the partition of the Indian sub-continent. Chandra Prakash Dwivedi’s film Pinjar represents the pain of the partition which engulfed three communities of India – the Hindus, Muslims and Sikhs. The film is also the story of a family, essentially the journey of the daughter of the family – Puro (Urmila Matondkar in a major role) and her transformation to Hamida, her loss of identity and her agony. Pinjar is set in 1946 which marked the pre-partition era. Even before the country was divided into two parts, communal rage had spread all over and violence was taking place in the name of religion. Pinjar tells the tale of a woman caught between two lands and coping with a dual identity. It is an effective portrayal of the suffering that women of the sub-continent had to undergo because of the decision to divide the country on the basis of religion. The partition was a painful experience for women and this is what the film tries to depict. The partition was a time when the state was immensely powerful to alter the lives of individuals because the decision of partition was taken by those who were at the helm of state affairs and the individual became absolutely powerless in the circumstance of displacement and identity loss because he/she had no control over their own lives. 

Puro’s family (father Kulbhushan Kharbanda, mother Lillete Dubey and sister Isha Koppikar) move to Chattowani from Amritsar to search for a perfect match for Puro. The major part of the film’s first half is dominated by the scenes of a happy family who dote on both their daughters. Here, Puro is an obedient and ideal daughter, the darling of her parents. She unquestioningly accepts what her parents decide for her marriage and is shown busy dreaming about the future that she is going to spend with Ramchand, her prospective suitor. Puro’s parents are extremely worried about the marriage of their daughters. All they seem concerned with is finding a good match so that they can get rid of the ‘burden’ of daughters. This is a telling statement on the status of women during that era. The pain and agony experienced by a mother is deftly conveyed in the song “Charkha Chalati Maa …”. Daughters were liabilities for parents especially during the partition where abductions and rape of women of both communities had become common occurrences. Puro’s father associates the idea of family honour with women of the family. The honour which young women like Puro carried on their shoulders turned out to be a burden for them. 

The partition as an important event in history shaped the ideas of honour and thereby the destinies of thousands of women both from India and Pakistan. Pinjar is told from Puro’s perspective. It is Puro’s voice that lingers in the narrative throughout the film. Partition changes her from a docile young lady to a strong individual as a result of the displacement and abandonment that she experiences. 

The turning point in the first half arrives when Puro is kidnapped by Rashid (Manoj Bajpai) who is seeking revenge from Puro’s family owing to settle a family score that goes back two generations. On managing to escape from Rashid’s house, when Puro goes back to her family, they refuse to accept and take her back home because she has lived with a stranger for many days which is detrimental to family ‘izzat’ and prospects for her sister’s marriage. Even when her brother Trilok tries to go against the father’s wishes and search for Puro, he is reprimanded and instructed to forget Puro’s existence and halt efforts for her search. Puro on the other hand is devastated and returns to Rashid to lead a life which is akin to that of a Skeleton (Pinjar). 

Puro’s identity undergoes a drastic change. Rashid forces marriage on her and from Puro she is now Hamida. She now has a new identity which she resists as she longs for her family and marriage to Ramchand. She tries hard to erase this new identity but cannot and thus resigns to fate. Meanwhile, after committing the crime of abducting Puro, Rashid is repentant and seeks redemption. He tries to care and provide for her, but Puro is unrelenting as the wounds inflicted by Rashid are unforgivable. These events take place at a time when the country is on the boil but Partition has yet not taken place. Even before the partition, relations between Hindus and Muslims have soured as each community tries to gain brownie points over the other. Through many scenes, the film exemplifies the division between the two communities even before the partition took place. For eg: when Puro (now Hamida) raises an abandoned Hindu infant, the Panchayat warns Rashid to return the child or face dire consequences. The fight is thus not over the child but over supremacy of religion. As a result, Puro loses the child and laments, “Ek Ek karke mera sab chin gaya … mera parivar, mera desh, mera bachcha!” Thus, the film is also about loss … not only the loss of one’s homeland and near and dear ones, the irreparable loss of identity. 

Pinjar is a story based on Amrita Pritam’s novel of the same name. The scene is set in Punjab which consisted of a significant Hindu and Muslim population. Since, the novel has been written by a female writer, it brings the women’s perspective to partition. Puro’s ultimate fate is decided by the act of partition which is a male dominated which is a male dominant decision in which the stakes of women are insignificant. As Puro, there were millions of women both from India and Pakistan who suffered the same sorry fate. The worst consequences of partition were faced by women. They became powerless in front of the authority of the state to draw artificial borders and divide people on religious grounds. Puro’s dilemma is repeated in the film when Lajjo (Puro’s sister-in-law) is abducted by Muslims and kept in capture in her own house. When Puro learns of Lajjo’s fate, she along with Rashid decides to help her reach safely to her family in India. She depicts immense strength in the hour of crisis to help Lajjo escape from the clutches of her abductors. 

The first half hour of the film is not very convincing because all you watch is a happy family singing and dancing together, rejoicing on the prospects of a daughter’s marriage. The film picks pace only as Rashid enters the scene and Puro’s world turns upside down. We see a reflection of Punjabi culture in the scenes and songs of the film. For eg: the desire for a son in the family, parents deciding their daughter’s fate, male dominance in the family and silence of female characters. The character of Rashid enters the story as a villain but ends up gaining both Puro’s and the audience’s sympathy. This has not been explained well. Why does Rashid undergo a change of heart? Why does he not take the initiative to send Puro back to her family? Manoj Bajpai’s excellent portrayal of Rashid is exemplified in his Muslim mannerisms, style and acting. He emotes very well especially when he is ridden with guilt and tries to woo Puro. In the climax, it is Rashid who helps Puro in the plan to bring Lajjo back. Whether or not he achieves redemption is left to the audience’s imagination. 

Pinjar is also about revenge … a revenge that a man seeks because of a family feud, a brother who seeks revenge for his missing sister … revenge that two communities seek on each other thereby destroying the secular fabric of the nation. The question of gender roles and identities has been successfully evoked in the film. Questions of social relevance like the marriage of girls, their education, their submerged desires are all seen in the light of the gendered views of contemporary society. There are many scenes and dialogues in the film which talk about women’s position in society. 

Eg: Is yug mein ladki ka janm lena hi paap hai

[It is a sin for a girl to be born in this age]

Song: Beton ko deti hai mehal atariya, beti ko deti pardesari

[To the boy, the mother gives all comforts, and to the girl … a stranger’s house]

It is not only the partition and the nation’s division that is the central focus of the film. The questions and complexities of gender have also been explored by the director. Puro is the narrator and the main protagonist of the story. The story is thus a reflection of her views not only on the partition but also on gender roles and gender socialization (Bharat, 2008). 

The songs of the film exhibit the pain of partition (Watna Ve O meraya Watna Ve) as also the pain of women who were being displaced from their homeland. In the climax, when Puro and Rashid are able to reunite Lajjo with her husband, Puro’s brother wants her to return to India. Here, she decides to stay back with Rashid because she does not want to be uprooted once again. Even though she faces a dilemma between her dreams of marrying Ramchand and the reality that she is now Rashid’s wife … Puro chooses to reconcile with the fact that the country has been divided and she is now on the other side of the border leaving all her near and dear ones far away. The film has been criticised for its climax in which Puro chooses to be with Rashid without offering any substantial explanation. My contention is that this aspect of the film should not be viewed from a gender lens but from a human lens. Her decision is important not as a woman but as a human being who chooses not be experience displacement again and in this sense, Puro’s decision is justified. This is also the only point in the film where she has been given a choice to take a decision and she does that. By the end, she emerges as a strong character who accepts her fate willingly and decides to carry on with life. 

There are still so many ‘Puros’ in Pakistan as well as India … having to deal daily with grief and trauma of leaving their land forcefully. The film is a wonderful tale weaved with many characters who portray the experiences of a part of the population which was neglected during the partition – women. In the same way as many Hindu women were forcefully made to leave India and live in Pakistan, the same fate was met by Muslim women. The woman’s body continues to be the object of male gaze and the custodian of family honour both at the same time and this is indeed ironical. We cannot label the film as a feminist film because the director has tried to examine many other issues even though women remain central to the film with partition as the backdrop. The larger question that the director is trying to ask is where women stand when it comes to the partition in cinema. Many films have been crafted on the sensitive issue of the partition but only few have addressed the fate of women in the event. Reflections on the partition have been examined through the male perspective of the state, of war and conflict, of power and not from the views of women who went through it. 

Whether it was Puro or Hamida, women became the ‘other’ during the partition. That ‘other’ whose lives did not matter, whose voices were silenced, whose identities were subjugated and who remained at the periphery of power struggle and power equations and who still continue to be marginalized and displaced at the cost of the ‘self’, the ‘state’ and the ‘man’. Pinjar thus gives a voice to this ‘other’ and their concerns of displacement, marginalization, dual identity and powerlessness in the face of state power.

Our first Skype chat

Me and Sehr have started our BPP 2014 journey and our first chat session took place on March 30, 2014. I felt it was extremely important for both of us to know who the 'other' is, what she is all about before we could start discussing on peace, India, Pakistan, conflict and other such complex issues. The BPP journey has put us together as partners and I take this journey as a holistic experience of friendship wherein we have to start building bonds with each other and also make an attempt to understand the 'other'. This I believe is the thrust of this project. So here we began our journey by chatting with each other. The first chat session encountered many technical glitches (technology after all is also susceptible to faults!). For the first few minutes we were not able to connect on video chat and then when we connected, there was an audio problem. Hence, we decided to engage in a text chat because I feel that connecting with each other should be aided by technology and not dampened by it. Technological tools are the 'soft power' instruments that we are using in this project and these are meant to facilitate our interactions. Our friendships should not succumb to these tools or be held hostage by them so whatever the medium, the interaction has to continue. With this spirit, we started talking to each other with an effort to get to know each other. 

I asked Sehr to tell me something about herself, what she is doing, about her studies and about her family. I also expressed my deep desire to her about visiting Pakistan especially Lahore and Islamabad. Sehr has just turned 18 (awww!!! thats so young :)) and is studying B.Sc Economics in Lahore University of Management Sciences (LUMS as it is famously called). I did tell my friends in India about the B.Sc in Economics that she is pursuing and most of them were surprised because they had never heard of a B.Sc in Economics, but mostly of a B.A. or a B.Com. Sehr told me that she is a bit inexperienced as far as life is concerned and is still trying to explore the various facets of life. Somewhere down the line it set me thinking about the age difference between us (she is 18 and I am 28). Its going to be a rocking combination of a young and an old lady with a mix of young enthusiasm and old experience (I did refer to myself as old !!!!). From the first day when I started my email exchanges with Sehr, she calls me 'Aapa' which means elder sister in Urdu. I told her that I felt very warm and friendly at this gesture of hers. Then we got talking about how she applied for this project and what was it that stimulated her to be a part of this. Personally since I had been working for my PhD on Indo-Pak Conflict Mediation since 2011 and had already connected with a few Pakistanis, I thought that this could serve as an interesting exchange where I could get to explore so many unknown facets about Pakistan. This is how I actually got hooked to the project. Sehr told me that  an instructor in her University shared the link of the BPP project on the page of the journalism society for which she works. And, it hit her instantly. She always wanted to do something like that because she fell in love with History when in the 8th and 9th grade. I asked to tell me in detail about the journalism society because incidentally I also did my Masters in Journalism and Communication and now I am married to a journalist husband. She then asked me about how a PhD is done, what is the time frame and what are the procedures and protocols to be followed while doing a PhD. I then narrated my long PhD journey to her, at the end of which she was gracious enough to offer her help to me in the process of research.

A picture of Ajra sent by Sehr

We then started conversing about our respective families. Sehr is from Sindh (and this is what has fascinated me because I have always wanted to talk to people who belong to parts of Pakistan other than the mainstream Lahore, Islamabad, Karachi etc). Sehr has three siblings - two brothers and a sister. Her sister's name is Saba. Her brothers' are studying in boarding school while her sister stays with her parents. I told her about the two families that I have - my parents and my husband and in-laws. I also told her about my sister who is presently studying Travel and Tourism Management from Gwalior. Sehr expressed her surprise at the diversity and variety in my family since each one is in a different profession. She said that she would like to visit India someday as she has heard that Indian people are very hospitable (Atithi Devo Bhava - Guest is God - as Indian philosophy teaches us). We then started talking about her hometown Sindh and I asked her how it is different from the other regions in Pakistan. She told me its a lot different and then sent me a picture of 'Ajrak' - which is a a traditional shawl type cloth which is prepared specially in Sindh. The discussion then shifted to the festivals celebrated in Sindh since I had heard that Sindh has a substantial Hindu and Sikh population. Sehr told me about the celebrations on Eid which reminded me of my Muslim friends and the delicious sevaiyaan kheer that is served in their homes during Eid. I recalled with fondness my visits to my Muslim friends during Eid (incidentally the next day we were celebrating our Maharashtrian New Year - Gudi Padwa and the discussion weaned towards how we celebrate it. Sehr also told me about the sevaiyaan ki kheer that her mother prepares on the day of Eid and I wish I can visit their place some day and have it for myself. 

Through the discussion, I got to know that the Northern areas of Pakistan are known as the Switzerland of Pakistan and that they are full of simply breath-taking natural beauty. I have seen some pictures of the northern areas and also got to know about them from a research colleague in Archaeology who visited Pakistan as part of an exchange program last year. Sehr's friends had been to Indian Kashmir and they liked it very much, though she could not be a part of the trip. I believe exchange programs serve as excellent platforms to know each other and get the real feeling of being in the place which you just imagined and were curious about. I told Sehr that I am very curious to know about Balochistan, FATA and NWFP in Pakistan. I have only heard about these places and I would like to know more about them. (Balochistan is in Southwest Pakistan, largest in area but little population with Quetta as its main city and Ziarat as a beautiful spot in the region).

The discussion then shifted to a serious note on the presence of the Taliban in Pakistan (this has been a regular news feature in the Indian media along with the attacks on the religious places of minorities, especially Hindu temples). I knew that this was a sensitive topic which should not be broached at such an initial stage in our talks but I was just too curious and could not stop myself and I am glad that Sehr responded to it. The Taliban say that Islamic Sharia Law is not followed in Pakistan. They want to make it proper Islamic Sharia Law to be followed and because of it, they want to change the constitution. If not, they want to destroy it. The Taliban's agenda also includes making women wear the hijab and enforcing their own laws and rules on the people of Pakistan. The mere of idea of this happening scares me and Sehr told me that things are not that good in some parts of Pakistan where Taliban are attempting to dominate. After this, on a personal note I asked Sehr what she thinks of the 'hijab' and does she wear it herself. I told her about a similar practice of 'ghunghat' in some parts of India and personally whether it is a hijab or a ghunghat I am not in favour of it. But Sehr put forward a very matured opinion on the issue and it amazed me. I appreciated her very balanced opinion. She said, "I am neither against nor for it. I have friends who wear it. It is not a bad thing afterall. When we offer prayers we do wear dupatta. So, it is just the act of being comfortable with. It is also choice of every individual right? It should not be used to judge people around. Like, there are lots of kinds of people. Some who will be good from inside but don't wear hijab and some who will be bad from inside but wear hijab, so such things don't tell us about our character. Which is used to assume things here and everywhere."  So here we did have a slight difference of opinion but then we both understood each other's view. That is why the BPP project is all about - Agreeing to Disagree.

At the end of the chat I asked Sehr about her career plans to which her answer was that she is still undecided on this but at present she seems to be inclined towards journalism. I told her about my dream to keep studying endlessly and to open a research institute of my own. Even her father is a passionate reader and it was his dream to see Sehr study in LUMS - one of the best universities in Pakistan. I would like to interact with her family some day, especially with her father. For now I am certain that she is fulfilling both her own and her father's dreams. The sweetest thing that she told me during the entire chat was "I love what you love" (in reference to my passion for research). On this note, we have begun our friendship and with each chat we hope to unfold a new chapter in this exciting journey.

Till the next talk Sehr - miss you and take care :) 

Des mera rangrez ye babu ...

This is not a movie review. It was not meant to be one. On Wednesday, 2nd April students from The Dept. of Political Science got together to watch Aamir Khan's critically acclaimed movie Peepli Live (2010) as a part of the activities conducted in The Open Society - a student forum of the department. The Open Society as the name suggests is an initiative to harbour open and free discussions on relevant socio-political issues. The forum is meant to engage students into meaningful discussions on issues of current importance, help them put forth their own perspectives and appreciate those of others. 

Peepli Live is an engaging take on the despicable conditions suffered by farmers in rural India. It would not be fair at this point to time to give out the story details, but a gist of the film would be helpful. The film narrates the trials and tribulations of Natha and his elder brother (both farmers in central India) and their desperate situation. In dire need of money, since they have a bank loan to repay, which otherwise would lead to mortgaging of their land, Natha and his 'bhaiya' come to know of a government scheme that offers a lakh rupees to farmers who have suicide. In desperate need of money (in order to save their family), Natha decides to go ahead and announce his plans about suicide. The local stringer of a newspaper catches on to this bit of news doing the rounds of the village and suddenly Natha's intention of 'live suicide' catches the attention of an entire nation through a media and political circus in his village. What follows is a satire about the conditions of Natha and his family and their exploitation by both the state and the media for altogether different purposes. 

What the movie very tellingly conveyed was the poor situation of farmers in India and the utter neglect of the state towards their conditions. Whenever elections are around the corner, we see political representatives making tall claims of schemes committed to farmer welfare. But once in power, all promises towards the farmer are forgotten and he/she is left to fend for himself/herself. In the last decade in Indian, scores of farmers have committed suicide owing to lack of state help, extreme conditions of drought and lack of any kind of financial assistance. The movie is a clever satire on such subtle issues. More number of suicides have been committed by farmers of the Vidarbha region in Maharashtra and I recall watching a Marathi movie on the same theme, a serious one albeit - Gabhricha Paus (2009).

After the movie we engaged in a discussion of sorts trying to think over the various issues that the movie tried to highlight. I for that matter kept noting down terms like 'politics of poverty', 'politics of suicide', 'politics of desperation'. These issues struck me when I saw the movie for the first time around (this was a second viewing). The use of satire as a tool in cinema was also an interesting point to note since movie makers have attempted to convey their take on serious issues such as poverty, education, communalism, corruption etc through the use of humour. I believe sometimes it becomes imperative to use humour and lightheartedness to comment on serious issues and raise awareness about them. But as Aparna, one of our students pointed out - not everybody is comfortable with the use of satire and in the end satire may end up reinforcing the status quo or induce some kind of arm-chair activism and niceties of ideology - where all we gloat about is taking and discussing the state of affairs in the cosy comfort zones that we are so used to. She also pointed out to the need for discussing more about solutions than about problems - since we are all aware of the problems that the country faces - but what is the solution that should be worked out ought to be a point of discussion.

I also repeatedly kept pondering upon the media's role. Once a media student, today I stand completely disillusioned about the media's role in the society. What the movie very prominently reflected upon was the media-state nexus, a collusion between two powerful entities in the society for two very different purposes - the state trying to save its skin by indulging in dirty politics over a farmer's bid to suicide by offering him completely irrelevant policy options (which clearly shows how poorly informed and shaped our policies are!) and the media using the same incident to encash on a tragedy to be for its own commercial motives. The depiction of the real media scenario in the movie turned out to be truly hilarious. One of our students Jay at the end of the movie wondered if the media was that bad. May be as an audience what we tend to do is either repose our complete faith in the media and idolize it or show our utter contempt and disregard for it. These extremities are where the problem lies. What I also found was an utter contempt on part of both the state and the media for the poor of the country. The farmer is actually reduced to a butt of jokes - a helpless creature being manipulated at the hands of both agencies - expecting some kind of assistance - but getting none. 

The movie centered around a tragedy - namely Natha's declaration of suicide - and the political and media circus that follows. Each and everyone, be it the chief minister, the opposition leader, the agriculture minister, the local politician wanted to encash the tragedy for their own benefit. For them it ceased to be a tragedy and turned out to be an opportunity to gain brownie points over the other. Surprisingly, in the whole process Natha, the central character is made a scapegoat and we ended up sympathizing with him. We felt he does not deserve death, he is being forced into it, being made an unnecessary martyr - one who sacrifices for the sake of selfish interests of those in power - or rather one who is made to sacrifice. Our discussion then further moved to the commodification of death - of how in present times death which is meant to be tragic can turn into a celebration of sorts if it benefits those in power and those in command and control of resources. Aparna pointed out that it all boils down to power - for vested interest make people in power position behave the way they do. During the course of the discussion, one of the students Imtiyaz pointed out to the lack of policy planning as well as the lack of effective policy implementation in the country. It was as if policies are churned out for the poor and they have no choice or say in the same. Policies are merely thrust upon them irrespective of any rationality or need for the same. In what sense will these policies benefit them is a question that should concern the political and bureaucratic class of the country. In a hilarious scene in the movie whereas Natha is in need of money to save his land/house he is offered a hand pump under a scheme named after a prominent leader. Later on, the chief minister of the state instructs his officials to devise a new policy in order to curb criticism from media and opposition parties. Towards the end of the movie we see Natha being honored by the way of a 'Natha card' being issued in his name - meant to be given to those farmers who intend to commit suicide!!! Though it would not be fair to reveal the movie's end here - what happens to Natha's family in the end is a reiteration of the abject state of policy planning and implementation in the country.

Towards the end of the discussion, Himmat brought out to relevant pointers - the reality of crony capitalism (how the state and the corporates work in tandem and the impact of globalization on the rural masses). He being from Haryana cited examples of farmers in his own village who became rich overnight as they got huge money by selling their land - but have now turned to anti-social ways of earning money since they squandered money recklessly once it was in their hands. What he also found problematic in the movie was the portrayal of the politician-bureaucrat relationship in which the politician bosses over the bureaucrat and the former has to abide by his diktats. He said that real scenario in India was quite the opposite with the bureaucracy wielding more power. 

At the end we came to the question of women - there were three distinct personalities of women depicted in the movie. First Natha's mother - bedridden but always cribbing about her daughter-in-law, the second being Natha's wife who though a rural woman seems to be in total control of the house - with a power to even abuse her husband and brother-in-law for messing the entire situation. The third woman in the story is Nandita, a TV news reporter - seemingly empowered and independent to take her own decisions but at the mercy of her editor. We were stuck with the question of who was the most empowered of the three and there was no concluding answer for the same since all of us had different answers - we decided to leave it at that and not reach to any pointed conclusion. Conclusion and definiteness were certainly not what we were looking for! 

In the end I still stayed stuck to the image of the farmer who keeps lingering onto the background - his lean and frail frame reminding us of the fact that there are many Nathas' in this country and Peepli Live was about just one of them!

Peace is the Superman

We see how powerful the word Peace is that only taking its name could bring infinite number of conflict from hither and thither. It is quite astounding to note that being 'Peace', it still could bring so much of the thunder? This is one thing which always provoked me. I was quite young, in about 6th grade that my mind had started this battle of peace and conflict with itself and it is quite interesting to know what was it that made it strive so much. It was Extremism that forced me to think. My story of why and how I turned up to this project is not shallow. So, continuing to talk about extremism, yes, it was religious extremism that pushed me here where I am. This war with peace started quite earlier in my mind and it was because of watching innocent people die everyday in my country. I still remember having this strong faith that we could stop Taliban of killing citizens of my country by negotiating because Peace lies in talking. It is important to note here that I didn't see any politician saying that we want talks and that is why this thought rooted in me but it was the result of continuous bloodshed. Since then, I always wanted to talk. I have always believed in Peace because I knew that the terrorism that just started was because of merely the mindset. Those people attacked and committed suicide because of mindset which grew so strong that it is still thriving. And this particular reason that if war can become this strong mindset then we have to make peace our mindset to counter-attack.

The idea was not complicated. It was that if they could kill, we could love. Peace can only pop in if we started loving each other because the complexity lies in just one idea that everybody can talk about bringing peace in the world but nobody can establish peace within themselves and to me, we instantly bring peace to this world when we intend to bring it within ourselves. It is this simple. However, we are a mess. Our thoughts are a mess, our intentions are mess and so are our deeds. There is no peace therefore. It is quite obvious to consider then that we are disabled to bring peace when everything is messy. We are disabled to dialogue about Peace. So, when I was struggling with this mess within myself I decided to take a step ahead. Maintain and talk. The simple idea of bringing peace within borders generated goosebumps and I couldn't help myself. Pakistan and India, even after 65 years of their separation can't forget their differences. Differences? This particular reason induced opposite analysis and that was that this project was designed in such a way to appreciate the similarities in people,culture and history. It was to identify those parts of our war which highlight peace and it was simply to meet our identicals from other Border. Here, it is substantial to regard that even twins from same mother are different in nature then how can two countries be akin in nature but victory is when both of them love and live together in harmony and not much but it is about the same regarding two neighboring countries as well. This is why I am in this Project with my Indian Partner Nidhi Shendurnikar which is purely because only Peace is the Superman.
So, stay tuned to peace.