‘Don’t make message films, send an SMS’

MUMBAI: “Deep down we are allheroes,’’ Anjum Rajabali declares. “But our heroism liessuppressed. So, when someone lives and becomes his ideals, they become a hero inour eyes.’’ He was reflecting on the appeal of Bhagat Singh,Bollywood’s lately-discovered hero. He has written the screenplayfor one of the five versions of the biopic to hit our screens—The Legendof Bhagat Singh, with Ajay Devgan, directed by RajkumarSantoshi.“Bhagat Singh reached an almost yogic state of harmonybetween his thoughts, beliefs and actions by the time he was 21. I keptthinking, what was I doing at that age?’’ says Rajabali, explainingthe man’s personal appeal for him. The film is a superb, rousing accountof the young Bhagat Singh, who was hanged when he was just 23.It offers arichly complex portrait of a youth whose popularity (by the Congress’ ownrecords) once rivalled Mahatma Gandhi’s, his intellectual growth and hisvision for a secular, socialist nation, rather than merely the gutsy hothead heis in the popular imagination (and doubtless some other film versions).AGoogle internet search on Rajabali reveals his exchanges with a Jungianresearcher on myths of troubled father-son relationships worldwide—likethe Nibelungenlied and the Telemachus-Odysseus tale—for a Hindi film storyhe’s writing. You know that the future of Bollywood is in safe hands.Rajabali’s diverse work includes Drohkaal (Govind Nihalani), Ghulam(Vikram Bhatt), Kachche Dhaage (Milan Luthria), China Gate, Pukar and The Legendof Bhagat Singh (the last three for Rajkumar Santoshi). Rajabali, who hasleftist leanings, tends to deal with violence, the establishment of a just orderand unlikely heroes.In fact, the Legend of Bhagat Singh perforce dealswith two heroes—Bhagat Singh and Mahatma Gandhi —and Rajabalidiscovers that the proposition is a double-edged sword. In one scene, althoughLord Irwin refuses to consider Mahatma Gandhi’s request to commute thedeath penalty for Bhagat Singh and his colleagues, Gandhi signs the Gandhi-IrwinPact in 1931 (for the release of certain political prisoners), and the theatresresound with catcalls.In a film honouring Bhagat Singh, Mahatma Gandhiinadvertently comes across as the villain of the piece. “‘What haveI done?’ I thought, when I heard the catcalls,’’ Rajabaliexclaims, ruefully. “The fact is that Gandhi signed the pact and thenasked for Bhagat Singh’s death penalty to be commuted. But the CensorBoard felt this showed Gandhi in poor light. So, it insisted that we show himasking for the pardon before signing the pact.’’This makesGandhiji seem like an even bigger villain. Rajabali defends Gandhi’sdecision. “The Gandhi-Irwin Pact had already been agreed upon, and muchlater,when the demand for the pardon of Bhagat Singh’s death penalty cameto a head, Gandhiji was too principled to blackmail Irwin to secureit,’’ he says.Why didn’t he show Gandhi’s point ofview in the film? “It is something I will always regret,’’says Rajabali. Rajabali.“I thought the audience would be saddenedthat even such a great man as Gandhi could not save Bhagat Singh. Instead, itmade them angry. In fact, when the violence broke out in Gujarat, I insisted wedelete another scene with Gandhiji, fearing that he would bemisunderstood.’’Rajabali explains that soon after the killingof ASP Saunders, “Bhagat Singh realised that terrorism was no way to getpublic support for the freedom movement, and became a man of non-violence. Heeven used the hunger fast— a Gandhian weapon—to challenge Gandhihimself.’’But isn’t that a remarkable irony he mighthave liked to address in the film—two men of non-violence fighting oneanother for a common cause? It would have opened up a large tract which wouldhave gone against the larger unity of the story,’’ Rajabalisays.But there is another irony that the film brings out movingly: BhagatSingh’s conviction that his death would benefit the freedom movement morethan his life would. Rajabali finds it redeeming that “the public cheerswhen Sukhdev slaps the British police officer who thrashes him. And, at theinterval, a viewer commented on Singh’s prediction that communal politicswould destroy the nation, ‘Barabar bola, dekho koi sunanahin’.’’In Rajabali’s view, the other two filmversions, 23 March 1931, Shaheed by Guddu Dhanoa and Shaheede-Azam by SukumarNair “fail to tackle Bhagat Singh’s intellectual maturity, and makea cliche of his politics. His actions seem to come from anger rather than a deepconcern for the nation. There is a subtle distortion’’.In anindustry notorious for having scripts concocted on the sets, Rajabali stands outas a bit of an oddity. He did tremendous research for The Legend of BhagatSingh, which evolved after seven drafts. Yet, he is one of the few scriptwritersto be consulted at the editing and even song-inserting stage.You’dexpect an intellectual scriptwriter to shudder when it’s song-time, butRajabali makes his peace by creating situations for songs to pre-emptinterference later’’. Remarkably, he adds, “I find mainstreamHindi cinema has always had a catholicity of form that allows even seriousissues to be explored in a popular format. So, rather than make films with amessage, you better send an e-mail or SMS.’’Yet, one waitswith trepidation to see what people go away with after his film. “BhagatSingh had repeatedly warned that religious fundamentalism would destroy India.When we claim to love our martyrs and then set fire to a Muslim home, we arebetraying their sacrifice. Gujarat is the ultimate betrayal. What people shouldremember about Bhagat Singh is not only how well he fought, but how well heloved.’’