Farouk Gulsara's Blog, page 26

Simple living is virtous?

Perfect Days (Japanese, 2023)
Director: Wim Wenders

(Please note: It is plural, not singular. Every day is a perfect day, and there are many!)

This is a reminder to recreational cyclists over 60: Just enjoy every opportunity that comes your way. By the twist of fate or alms from karma, you can go out, pedal, and feel the wind whisk by as you zoom downhill. Only some people are gifted with the privilege to do this. There is no need to outdo a fellow cyclist, go all out for a personal record, or invest in a state-of-the-art, spanking-new machine to keep up with the Joneses. Every completed cycling route happens on a perfect day. There will be many perfect days.

This beautifully crafted film gets all my thumbs up. It moves very slowly with apparently no definite direction, but that, in essence, that is the message behind the movie. We should find happiness in the things around us. 

The protagonist, Hirayama, is a creature of routine. He gets up to the rhythmic pace of a street sweeper sweeping the street. From that, it is like clockwork. Folding his mattress neatly, washing up, trimming his moustache, slipping into his overalls, and getting his keys organised, he exits his door. He looks out gleefully at the morning sky. Next is coffee from the vending machine, and gets into his working van. In the truck, he listens to songs that suit his mood on a cassette player! He is a proud, dedicated worker who cleans public toilets. 

Even though he realises that he is viewed with condescension, he knows his job is essential and does it diligently. 

His lunchtime routine is also set. Armed with a packet of drinks and a sandwich, he sits on the same park bench every day, observing people and seeing the ray of light dancing through the shadows of the leaf (Komorebi*). He snaps moments he finds something fascinating on his analogue automatic camera (with physical films!). His mobile phone is also an analogue. He is content without learning to take digital photos or using apps like Spotify. He sneers at them and is pleasantly surprised that his cassette can fetch much money if sold. He is happy having his daily bath at the public bath and eating from the same stall at the food court. Once in a while, he would visit a lady who runs her small restaurant and sometimes sings for her customers.

A few things happen in his mundane life. His niece, his sister's daughter, runs away from her wealthy home for a few days. Hirayama's sister turns up, and we learn about his animosity or disagreement with his ailing father. The lady restaurant, whom Hirayama secretly fancies, is seen caught in a passionate embrace with an unknown man.  

He threads everything in a stride and never fails to catch up by reading classic short stories and essays before he retires for the night, including Shakespeare and Faulkner. 

Our minds like to wander. Probably because of that, a regimental style of life is prescribed to live right. We are told to live simply. Unfortunately, it does not work at a collective level. If everyone maintains an Epicurean form of living, being content with the bare minimum and not venturing beyond his comfort zone or, like Sissyphus, accepting his fate as someone who needs to find happiness within his endless rolling up the boulder and it rolling back, the human race would still be dwelling in caves! 'Now is now' and 'next time is next time', as Hiroyama advocates, give peace of mind to an individual, not protect the community from adversities. 4.5/5.

* Komorebi is a Japanese word that means the play of sunlight through leaves. 

** Hirayama's excellent cassette collection includes Lou Reed, the Kinks, Otis Redding, Velvet Underground, the Rolling Stones, and more

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Each day is a little life: every waking and rising a little birth, every fresh morning a little youth, every going to rest and sleep a little death. Arthur Schopenhauer.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

Don Quixote’s Paradise

It is the year 2074. Yes, the world is still around, and so is the human race. It has been over a century since Malaysia received its mandate to self-rule. Technically, we should be in a utopia with so much sunlight throughout the year and a chirpy tropical climate devoid of depressing, chilling winters or debilitating natural calamities. A potpourri of food options is available 24/7 at our fingertips and delivered to our doorsteps with easy-access drone servers. We should be the happiest people in the world. In reality, however…

https://borderlessjournal.com/2024/05/14/don-quixotes-paradise

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

Deep down we want some masala!

Amar Singh Chakila (Hindi, Punjabi; 2024)

Director: Imtiaz Ali

Whilst self-proclaimed intellectually minded individuals peruse the internet for minute-to-minute updates on the situation in Gaza, the masses are pretty contented sneaking into the WhatsApp communication between Aliff Aziz and Ruhainies, the latest two-timing pair of the Malaysian showbiz scene. Netizens feel for the wounded wife, Bella Astillah, who used to be Ruhainies' bosom buddy. 

Neither party, the 'intellectuals' or the regular people, can do anything to change the trajectory of the event. In no way do these events bring them their bread or make their lives more fruitful. But it allows the masses to divert their attention from their mundane lives. They do not want their lives to be complicated, but they find solace in finding how much muck goes on in people's lives. And how virtuous is theirs, until, of course, the readers' own story becomes the topic of the day…

Look around us at regions ruled by regimes which promote religion as their bedrock of creating a 'sinless' society. Paradoxically the regions turn out to be the ones with the most subscribers of Porn Hub, of rape, drug abuse, incest and domestic disharmony. 

My Malaysian Punjabi friends had not heard of this singer until this movie was shown on Netflix. Sure, they had heard that many Punjabi singers get killed, promote gun violence, and are misogynistic and vulgar, but somehow, Chamkila missed their radar. Now they know that he was once the highest-selling musician in Punjab and was even more popular than Amitabh Bachchan. Someone even referred to him as the 'Elvis of Punjab'. Sadly, he was gunned down while arriving for a show. He joined the now famous 'Club 27' - the talented musicians who conspicuously died at 27 - Cobain, Winehouse, Morrison, Hendrix and more. This was in the 80's.

Chamkila's story was that his songs were liked by the majority but no moral guardians of society. The moral guardians felt that Chamkila's vulgar, immoral song lyrics were not what the public wanted to hear. Funny, if that is not what the public wants to hear, how come his records are the highest grossers?

Chamila is not even his surname. It was given or maybe mispronounced by the introducer. Amar Singh started life in a lowly Dalit family, growing up in feuding families amidst a rather 'not-so-refined' neighbourhood. Caught in an unsatisfying job making socks, he composed songs to the tune of his musical instrument, the tumbi, during his free time.

A singer, Jinda, picked up his talent, and Amar Singh started writing songs for him. When Jinda failed to appear on time at one of his shows, Amar Singh had to fill in. The audience was so taken up by his rendition that they did not want Jinda when he eventually appeared later. Amar's singing career started then. After partnering with a few female singers, he stuck with Amorjit.

Amar and Amorjit became romantically linked. They got married. Only later did Amorjit find out that Amar was already married before.

The duo found success after success. Appointments were pouring from villages, towns and even overseas. There were criticisms regarding their overtly vulgar lyrics and crass tone of songs, but the money that came with the shows seemed to sanitise everything. When Amar's father got furious seeing that Amar had cropped his hair, his anger simmered down when Amar presented him with a stack of cash he earned singing. When his first wife and family got crossed when they discovered his clandestine marriage to Amorjit, everything was squashed with a promise of fat alimony and compensation.

Things became complicated when the Sikh elders and Kahalistani members accused him of corrupting the youth. Amar then started writing devotional songs and the call for freedom. The police construed these as dog whistles for the general public to rise up to the call of the Kahalistani movement. After all, this was the heady time after Indra Gandhi's assassination and national discontent with the Sikhs. Chamkila was confused. When the police and the religious people forbade him to sing his songs, the general public wanted more and more of his songs with raunchy lines about peeping toms and promiscuous MILFs. 

There was a strong suspicion that Khalistani hitmen killed Amar Singh Chamkila and Amorjit as they were getting down from their car for a performance at a small village on 8th March 1988, but nothing was proven. The killers are still at large.

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

Our past controls the present?

Bhoothakaalam (The Past / Ghost Time, Malayalam; 2022)

Director: Rahul Sadasivan

There is a little wordplay with the title. With the prefix ’Bhooth’, one may wonder whether it is a horror movie. When one starts watching the film, one would wonder whether it is about the ghost of the past. That is what it is all about—how the ghost of the past comes haunting if it is not exorcised head-on. The ugly demonic head of the past has a self-defeating habit of repeating itself, making one go through the malady repeatedly.

No one will take kindly to others’ advice on how one’s life should be lived. No one will be flattered when told his head should be checked. That is what it is. Individuals should take a step back, access their mental health occasionally, and take preventive measures or make amends. Be the change. Change comes with realisation and from the inside. No one can make the horse drink water. The horse must first feel thirsty. The need to change comes from within.

Viewers wonder whether it is a horror film or if there is a more prosaic explanation for all the weird happenings around the house.

Is the recently departed grandmother’s soul returning with a vengeance to express her dissatisfaction? Is the house displaying poltergeist activities? Why do tenants after tenants die in the same house? Is the mother’s overt depression or the son’s indulgence in intoxicants the culprit?

The family had gone a lot. The son lost his father at a young age. He grew up without a father figure. The mother had to struggle with her unsatisfying teaching job at a nursery and later caring for her stroke-stricken paraplegic mother.

The son carries a heavy cloud of resentment after being forced to do medicine, which he had to quit and failing to secure a job with his pharmacy degree. He smokes heavily and drinks himself drunk frequently. His relationship with his girlfriend could be much better. When funny things start happening in the house, he flips. Soon enough, even his mother sees the abnormal activities in the house.

In a very clever manner of storytelling and filmmaking, the director takes us through a roller coaster ride to keep us guessing whether the whole point of the movie is to impress the viewers on the need to treat mental illness correctly or whether there is such a thing as ghosts?!

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.


This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

A case for abolition of jury system!

American Crime Story (Season 1; 2016) The People v. O. J. Simpson

A 64-year-old man was imprisoned for a year after being caught stealing ten cans of sardines, two bottles of instant coffee powder, and some mouthwash. He was punished with a month's imprisonment.
In the justice system, an individual trusted with the coffers of the nation and its future, accused of amassing RM 42 million for his own needs, gets 12 years in prison. This happened after much public pressure, demonstrations, democratic change of government and taxpayers coughing out more money to finance what turned out to be a non-ending series of trials-within-trials. Because the ex-PM has all the money that can buy justice and legal minds, there is a high possibility that he will end up spending the rest of his royal-pardoned six years under house arrest, in the comfort of his loved ones and window to the outside world. That is the best justice system that money and influence can buy.

This is by no means confined to the third world or despotic governments. It is a worldwide phenomenon.

When the Malaysian courts discontinued the jury trial system in 1995, the naive me thought it was a step backwards for justice. After all, more impartiality is displayed when more people collectively decide, and developed countries, particularly the US, still use jury services. So they must be right, I thought.

The sensational trial of Mona Fandey et al. gruesomely murdering a state assemblyman created such mayhem that the courts thought that trial by jury should be abolished.

The merits and demerits have been in the legal fraternity's imagination for years. In India, the famous 1959 case of a naval officer, Nanavati, murdering his wife's lover created such a storm that the legal system felt the sensationalism surrounding the trial made the juries err on their judgement. The Bombay High Court later reversed the jury's decision of freeing him to impose life imprisonment.
The opponents of the jury system argue that the law is too complex for an average person to comprehend, who may also be swayed by emotion, prejudices and sentiments.
In this time and age, with the bane of knowledge and information, we humans are more confused than ever. Like in the immortalised lines from the movie 'A Few Good Men', the real question is, 'Can you handle the truth?'. With so much information, emotion, biases, innate bigotry and prejudices bottled up within us, how unflinching can be towards the real truth?
This proposition is laid bare in the case People of the Stae of California v. O. J. Simpson, which took place when the American sports icon, Simpson, was accused of murdering his ex-wife, Nicole Smith, and her companion, Ron Goldman.
Cuba Gooding Jr as OJ, David Schwimmer as
Robert Kardashian, John Travolta as
Robert Shapiro. On the one hand, a black football player who beat the odds with his rags-to-riches story to be super rich, marry a white girl and live in a posh white, exclusive neighbourhood in LA. Some also looked at OJ as Uncle Tom, who had become a white, not as a black man. On the other hand, Nicole has reported domestic abuse in the relationship. When a blood-stained glove with OJ's and both victims' blood was found in the vicinity of the murder, the prosecution went all ballistic to charge him with double murder. They were clear in their approach. It was a case of domestic violence gone overboard.
From the get-go, the defence took a racial slunt towards the case. At a time in America when the police (like now) had the dubious reputation of being overtly racist in the way they handled their affairs. The Rodney King killing and the LA riots were They went along with the idea that the pieces of evidence were planted by bigoted police officers. To top it the lead defence lawyer, John Cochrane, drew in the support of the NAACP (North American Association for the Advancement of Coloured People, founded 1909). The defence tried to recruit as many black jurors as they could. In their mind, even though Simpson had turned into an Uncle Tom-like character with a white wife, country club and all, he was framed because he was black. That is where the defence was looking for sympathy.
With the fueling of fire by the extensive media, the trial became a competition between the whites and blacks of America. The whole trial became a media circus. First, it starts with Simpson engaging in a low-speed police car chase. Then, the trial was televised on Court TV, making people hooked on the twists and turns the case took. By the end of the nine months of trial, people were waiting outside the courthouse with bated breath to hear the jury decision. The jury took less than 4 hours to deliberate. Even though it provided a sound argument backed by scientific data, it was not enough. Simpson had apparently built a fan base among the jurors. They also voted along racial lines. The verdict would have been different if the jury was predominately white. The trial of the century ended with O. J. Simpson walking out a free man. A poll suggested almost 75% of white respondents believed OJ was guilty, whilst about only 25% of blacks thought he was guilty.
What is this about OJ's defence team being a dream team? I suppose it must be a group of morally corrupt individuals who mask themselves behind a law degree, unscrupulously stir sentiments, and churn out uncertainties in investigations and technicalities to create that element of reasonable doubt to crush the conviction. They promise the stars and the moon and charge an arm and a leg.
Robert Kardashian, the estranged husband of Kris Jenner (of the ''Keeping Up with the Kardashians' fame), was on the dream team. As a close friend and an attorney, he completed the whole trial convinced he was defending a guilty guy. To add fuel to the fire, 13 years after his acquittal in 2007, OJ was charged and later imprisoned for 33 years for armed robbery with a mostly white jury. So much for a fair trial and the adage that everyone is innocent until proven guilty.

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

Lost in KL?

Lost in Bukit Bintang?It has been a long since I came to this side of town. More than 30 years ago, this place was 'happening' like the lingo in those days. A place brightly lit with neon lights, the epitome of capitalism, the enticement of the giant evil as it ushers in its sheep to the slaughter. Innovative advertising and enchanting window dressing were baits to detach the salaryman from his hard-earned in a jiffy. That is capitalism 101. There were a few choices back then, and Bukit Bintang was it. The place to be for the hip and trendy.

Now, I feel lost. Walking on the footpath, I feel like a foreigner in my own 'Tanah Tumpah Darah Ku'. Everyone passing me looks foreign, speaking in incomprehensible tongues. Even the servers at the stall that line the footpath do not look local.

Like a deer caught in the headlights, I felt like the proverbial deer that entered the village (Rusa masuk desa). I was too afraid of how things had morphed so fast since the last time I brought my kids here.

Oh, deer! An Englishman in New York?Come to think of it, this is how my 84-year-old mother would be feeling right now. Born at a time when Malaya was under the tooth-and-nail of the Japanese Army, she must have a green, lush, malaria-laden tropical country transform into an oasis of modernity with skyscraping structures lining its skyline. With modernity came automation, artificial intelligence and self-working services that needed users' input. Computers and remotes are complicated for the non-IT-savvy individuals who missed the boat to educate themselves to be computer-literate. To top it all, the mind is willing, but the body and brain functions are weak, frustrating any attempts at wanting to partake in events of the changed world. 

With declining cognitive function, I fear the day when she would feel like a drowning person struggling to hold on to straws, trying to make sense of the murmurs that surround her telling her to do something...

What is it for the rest of us who want to be included in the wave of changes? It constantly reminds us that we should stay abreast of things. We do not want to be like India, thrown under the bus while Britain rode the bus of the Industrial Revolutions' first and second waves at the expense of India's raw materials and market. India is now doing a catch-up. Why bother with the bus now that we have hoverboards (hint: Back to the Future)!

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

A veiled glance?

Laapataa Ladies (Missing Ladies; Hindi; 2024) Director: Kiran Rao
At first glance, I thought it would be an Indian culture-bashing offering—one that ridicules some out-of-date traditional practices and tries to showcase how ridiculous India really is. Perhaps it would also include a couple of corrupt policemen on the side to drive home the point. I was wrong. It turned out to be a simple story about women empowerment, told in a simple manner and mainly using new faces, minus the glitz and razzmatazz typically associated with Bollywood.
It starts with two newly wedded couples travelling in the same train compartment. As per practice in the conservative societies of the Hindi heartland, brides are expected to wear full veils to show chastity. The funny thing is that both brides donned the same saree colour and had about the same body constitution. Hence, in the dead of the night, in the confusion of almost missing the train station, Deepak alights the train sleepily with the wrong bride, Jaya. Deepak's wife, Phool, gets down a few stations later with the other groom.
Both couples soon realise they have the wrong girl. Phool refuses to leave the railway station till her husband comes looking for her. The long arm of the law takes a long time to rectify the confusion. The interim period shows us that Jaya really has something up her sleeves or, rather, under her ghunghat (veil). Phool undergoes a baptism of fire to realise she is more than a helping hand to her new family and that she can stand on her own feet.
After much confusion caused by Phool's ignorance and Jaya's conniving ways, Phool and Deepak reunite. Jaya's dream comes true. Happy ending.
The practice of brides and married women wearing a ghunghat (traditional veil) tickled my mind. Many societies view it as a portrayal of chastity. In reality, it is nothing like that. 
In ancient India, during the times of Muslim invaders, the Muslim victors would often go on a victory lap, rewarding themselves. As per their religious scriptures, the Muslim soldiers are entitled to keep the captured women as sex slaves. Imagine Hindu women running away from their invaders, chasing them on horseback. Wearing a veil must be a sure way to hide their Hinduness, hence escape captivity. I think, over time, the veil became a saving grace and soon got imbibed as a daily wear. Soon, it was imposed on women to safeguard themselves and be viewed as a sign of purity. Temple-going ladies, too, follow this practice to show reverence. To prove my point, we do not see this, i.e. ladies scarfing their heads in temples, in lands not conquered by Muslims like Tamil Nadu. Food for thought.

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

Love overcomes?

May December (2023)
Director: Todd Haynes

A May-December marriage is between two people with a wide age gap. May refers to the proverbial spring (of life), while December refers to late autumn or winter.

The story is based on the 1997 infamous case of Mary Kay Letourneau, an elementary school teacher in Washington, aged 34, who had sexual relations with her 12-year-old student, Villi Fualaau. She was charged with rape. She delivered a love child during the trials. She was later imprisoned for breaking a plea agreement. After her release, the teacher and student married in 2005 and went on to have a set of twins. Mary already had four children when she was teaching Villi. She was having troubles in her marriage and was diagnosed as having bipolar disease. Both Villi and Mary justified their actions as acts of love.

This film revisits the Mary Kay-Fualaau family in 2015. The timeline is out here. The couple has three kids, including a pair of twins. An actress, Elizabeth (Natalie Portman), who is to play Mary's part (Gracie in the film, Julianne Moore), drops in the household to get a feel of things to play the role. At the end of the day, the viewers get more than what they bargained for. It tries to dive into the family dynamics as their second born (the twins) graduates from high school. Elizabeth tries to do more than is needed. She tries to interview Gracie's immediate family and ex-husband to get a composite picture of what made Gracie and Joe (Villi's part) get together. She also tries to evaluate the family dynamics.

What we gather is a domineering, control-freak kind of a wife who wants to have the final say in everything. She creates an aura of calmness and a business-as-usual atmosphere at home. In reality, at best, she is passive-aggressive in getting things done. She is disliked by many and is a registered sex offender. She continues receiving hate mail. People boycott her. Joe, on the other hand, appears unsure about everything. He is a passive member of the family. It seems like he has had arrested development, missing all the late teenager's years of exposure. If we remember, he was burdened with father's duty at 13. As the movie progresses, we can see that Joe has second thoughts about the arrangement but lingers on for the children's sake, not wanting to be the cause of their psychological well-being. In real life, Villi and Mary Kay divorced in 2019.
The actress Elizabeth, on the other hand, is no saint either. She uses her unique position and feminine charm to extract all she needs from people around here, including bedding Joe, for her career advancement.
An interview with a Tamil actor still at the height of his career and has a late teenage son comes to mind. When asked about the pros of marrying early, he replied that one's life is more malleable when young. Marrying young gets one to mould himself to fit the demands of the new family. Delaying one's marriage to a later makes one develop routines and idiosyncrasies that are challenging to shake off, quickly creating friction. I disagree with that statement. Getting committed at a tender age to the whims and fancies of the raging hormones, ill-prepared for the challenges of family life can be disastrous, too. The appreciation of the wedding institution and the willingness to uphold it at all expense would ensure success. 
Bending the minds towards one particular narrative would ensure the continuity of the status quo. Some call this 'Peace on Earth'; others call it the domination of the elitists. When the mind becomes inquisitive and screams to break free, they call it a revolution, which can be 'Hell on Earth'!

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

The schizophrenic society...

Das Lehrerzimmer (The Teacher's Lounge, German; 2023)
Director: Ilker Çatak
I feel lucky to have been born at the time I was born. If I were born to be a young adult at the present time, living in a 'so-called' developed nation, there is no absolute reason why I should not be a raving lunatic. The society is broken. Nobody respects anybody anymore. Power is too democratised. People with the most miniature brains are given on a silver platter the right to manage something they cannot handle - their rights. People think they know what they want, but they know diddly-squat. The individual is more important than the community. Personal liberty is more important than the common good of the community. Everyone demands the right to know about everything, but at the same time, there is a compulsion to protect information and privacy.

This schizophrenic environment of today makes eccentricity the default mode of people's response. For every move perceived as offensive by the other, the whole extent of legal jargon is employed. The long arm of the law is utilised for what will make everyone more miserable than they already are. The lawyers are the only ones who seem happy in the process, laughing all the way to the bank.

The society members immerse themselves in a pool of paranoia, low-esteeming and suspicious of their neighbours, and high-strung in a cesspool of siege mentality. 

The movie takes us to a German secondary school where somebody notices money goes missing in the teachers' lounge. The disciplinary teacher decides to run a spot check on students. A student of immigrant background is found to have a lot of money. The student's parents insist that the money was his allowance and accuse the school of racial profiling. Carla, a newbie class teacher of the student, decides to conduct her own investigations. 

She leaves her laptop camera on to record the possible thief. She thinks she possibly recorded a probable offender and confronts that person, Kuhn. Unfortunately, the accused denies everything and turns against her, accusing Carla of invading her colleagues' privacy. Carla reports the situation to her principal, who worsens the problem. She decides to report the case to the police. Kuhn is suspended. 

That soon develops into a living hell for Carla. Kuhn's son, who studies in Carla's class, demands to know what is happening? As investigations are ongoing, the school board decided to keep it under wraps. Soon, all the students' parents insisted on knowing what was happening. The student editorial board demands to know the whole truth. They publish truths and half-truths under the banner of freedom of expression. The school is in mayhem, doing everything except teachers' teaching and students' learning. 

In this modern generation, schools are doing everything except learning. They try to pinpoint scapegoats for all their failures and bring down others for making the level field lopsided, in their minds, of course. 

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

It's one country!

Article 370 (Hindi; 2024)

Director, Screenplay:  Aditya Suhas Jambhale

In some circles, the mention of abrogating Article 370 is a bad word. In their mind, it denotes a loss of independence, dignity, and rights. As complicated as this issue is, it gets more convoluted as time passes, and politicians with personal agendas get intertwined in the imbroglio.

The story of Kashmir goes back to the time of Indian Independence. It is all about religion and whether it should be acceded to India or Pakistan. When Great Britain wanted to give India independence, Kashmir, being a princely state, i.e. run by royalty, was given the option of joining India or Pakistan. The ruler of Jammu and Kashmir, Maharajah Hari Singh, wanted to stay alone. The problem is the ruler was a Hindu in a predominantly Muslim population. The local popular political parties closely associated with Jinnah's Muslim League were adamant about joining Pakistan.

What happened afterwards depends on who tells the story, Indians or Pakistanis. The Indian version is that Pakistani vigilantes, dressed as tribesmen, moved into Kashmir and started commotion. The Pakistanis say the Kashmiri Hindus brought in RSS members and Hindus from the rest of India to tip the Hindu-Muslim balance. Gandhi squarely blamed the Maharajah for mishandling the communal riots that ensued later.

Hari Singh then sought military assistance from India. As per the wish of the majority, as the upheaval was seen solely as Pakistani Army's doing, he signed off the accession of Jammu and Kashmir to India. He abdicated to Bombay after appointing a Governor and a Prime Minister.

The skirmishes between India and Pakistan continued until they engaged in a full-scale war. Even though Kashmir was theirs for control, in his wisdom, Nehru thought that the United Nations should be involved. The UN called for a ceasefire, drew the line of control and divided Kashmir between India and Pakistan in about 2 to 1 ratio.

In 1965, the countries went to war again over Kashmir. This time, Pakistan thought it could stir the sentiments of the Muslims to riot against India. It was called Operation Gibraltar. It again ended in a stalemate after the US and the Soviets appeared as peacemakers, making them sign the Tashkent Declaration.

The fact that Pakistan named the operation Gibraltar is indicative of its vision. As in Islamic history, where the Iberian peninsula was attacked by Muslim invaders from Gibraltar, Pakistanis perceive the whole of Kashmir as legitimately Islamic land that cannot slip away to infidels. That is the bottom line.

Fast forward fifty years later, the country still has not resolved its internal issues. The 1990s saw further deterioration of inter-religious relationships, resulting in massive persecution and exodus of its Hindu population.

From an Indian lens, they see Kashmir as a prodigal child. Even though it is technically Kashmir is part of India, it seems to have special status. It has its own flag. Article 370 was a temporary measure enactment to give autonomy before it got on its feet.

With the passage of time, political wrangling, and internal law manipulation, the article became an entitlement. The ruling class and their lackey seem hellbent on maintaining the status quo, as the BJP saw when it was campaigning to form the Government in 2014.

Modi, could be AI generated!This film centres around the time when the Government of the day went around trying to repeal the temporary Article 370 to get Kashmir to be under Presidential rule with cloak and dagger method in a cat-and-mouse chase to hoodwink the internal cabal that wants to keep the status quo. The Kashmiri leadership are comfortable with the previous arrangement as it kept them in power and enriched their cronies. 
The film, criticised by many who do not favour the current Government, is said to portray a very right-winged look Hindu look at the whole scenario. It is suggested that the movie is a propaganda piece for the upcoming Indian general election. The film suggests that the Kashmiri leadership is colluding with India's enemy, Pakistan, to uproot the state out of the Union. The battleground is tattered with religious ideology. And money (lots of it) is a lubricant. The ending suggests that things are better in Kashmir after the abrogation. Peace is noticable. Tourism is picking up, and so is hoped, the economy.

The friction has been going on for so long that each person looks at the other as if they are from a different country. This is observed in one of the dialogues, 'It is not about us and them. We are one country!'

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.