Agashe joins disgruntled directors' lot

pune: on monday, when mohan agashe relinquishes charge of the film and television institute of india (ftii), he will join a long line of directors who left disillusioned and disgruntled. for, at least five out of ten ftii principals have been defeated by the combination of students’ resistance and i&b ministry’s apathy to the changes they’ve sought for proper functioning.agashe’s immediate predecessor, john shankarmangalam (1993-’96) was an erstwhile student and faculty member. strikes started when he introduced a subject in april 1996. after about a month he took sick leave and never returned to the office. likewise k.g.varma, a haryana cadre ias officer who held office between 1986 and 1991, took study leave when things got rough and stayed on in the director’s quarter. eventually v.b. chandra, chief producer, films division, took additional charge (1991-’1993). the tradition of students going on strike started during the tenure of jagat murari.the second director had come to ftii from the films division and held charge twice (1962-1971; 1976-79). his first term ended after he introduced a specialisation course in direction, and a strike broke out over what should be scrapped, acting course or direction. this debate had started in 1971 when, for every jaya bhaduri or mithun chakravorty who made it big in bollywood, there were 19 other actors who were condemned to struggle. the situation was acute since television had yet to take roots in india. the fourth director girish karnad (1974-’75) had to bear the brunt of the dissension until the acting course was dissolved. naseeruddin shah was among the final batch of graduates. n.v.k. murthy, who’d come from the film finance corporation for barely eight months, faced resistance because students wanted to choose any specialisation course regardless of ftii’s resources. but perhaps none had to face as many strikes as varma: in 1989, the students agitated in january against fines imposed for leaving the campus without permission; in july during the convocation for reinstatement of a student who had failed in the sound course; and until december for shifting projects from the fifth to the sixth semester. mahesh bhatt, who believes “creators are not manufactured in schools’’, resigned as chairman of the governing council when students displayed placards at the convocation saying “don’t kill the institute.’’ thespian dilip kumar lambasted the students for not respecting the guru shishya parampara. “they first go to the director, then to the governing council, finally to the ministry.and when no one ‘listens’—agrees with them— they go on strike,’’ agashe notices a pattern. director adoor gopalakrishnan, an ftii alumni who was chairman before bhatt, accuses the staff of encouraging strikes. “the director doesn’t actually teach: it’s the teacher whose dissatisfaction finds an outlet through these strikes.’’ the teachers have job security but are not on par with the ugc scale, and are not practising the art they teach. gopalkrishnan also lambasts the government which “interferes in the decisions of the council, rescinds on recommendations of commissions set by itself, and winds up restructured courses before they can be put to practice to satisfy strikers’’. how to administer the institute and what to teach are the concerns of the governing council, not of students, but “they want to decide what they should be taught’’. according to bhatt, the ftii today has no profile. “it was set up in the 1960s to create quality students who would create cinema of the world.’’ these students could not fit into mainstream cinema, so the government set up nfdc to fund them. “but all of this is so divorced from the tax payer who funds them!’’ today, ftii must decide who its model student is,’’ insists bhatt.“or, like a polytechnic, give students the skill, and let them decide whether to make documentaries, mainstream or alternate films.’’