From 'Kuttrapathirikai' to 'Parasakhti, 'Jana Nayagan': A history of censorship in Tamil political cinema

Censorship in Indian films is necessary for the harmony between power and responsibility. The Central Board of Film Certification (CBFC) ensures that films are screened on the possible impact of the release on societal harmony, national integrity, public image, and morals. Subjects related to politics, religion, history and other controversial issues are much prone to be tamed during the reviews and ratings. Although the censoring board may act as a hurdle to creativity, it has its reasons as long as it considers the community’s safety and morals are upheld. Political issues and subjective interpretation could delay the film's screening while lawsuits gain status in the media.

Recent controversies surrounding 'Jana Nayagan' and 'Parasakthi'

Two new releases, starring Thalapathy Vijay and Sivakarthikeyan, respectively, have rejuvenated debate around censorship. The latest film from Vijay, 'Jana Nayagan,' has met multiple delays in its censor certification process, requiring legal action given it is speculated to be his final film before entering politics. Interventions by the Madras High Court were needed after the censor accreditation process proved controversial, with the film’s release even bypassing the intended Pongal exclusivity. At the same time, 'Parasakthi', which is set in the context of the anti-Hindi imposition protests of 1965, is facing a hold up in classification over demands to censor certain scenes. The above recent examples show that censorship in relation to political films may be met with considerable resistance on part of the public, which may include legal consequences that may affect the access to the film.

Earlier struggles: The censor battles of Tamil cinema

Long before these recent controversies, the Tamil film industry had endured several films marred by censorship. 'Kuttrapathirikai' (1992) by R. K. Selvamani, featuring the 1992 Rajiv Gandhi assassination, sat on the shelf because of the political violence it captures. It took 15 years for it to be born in 2007. 'Gypsy' (2018) featuring Jiiva, from Raju Murugan's 15 years collection was shelved for dogged protests over a realistic identity and religious prejudice. Steeped in songs and hype, it failed to make a debut until 2020 after being cut.

'Aaranya Kaandam' (2010), the first movie by the dark side of director Thiagarajan Kumararaja, appeared under censorship for an adult film; after 52 cuts and squeezing 10 minutes off the original movie duration, the film got a response with positive reviews. 'Pulan Visaranai 2' (2005) was stuck for 10 years because of censorship board's disapproval of 26 scenes and got a release in 2015 with disappointing business. 'Manushi' (2022), featuring Andrea Jeremiah, directed by Gopi Nainar, remains unreleased since the board found the film to be socially sensitive.

On being questioned about censorship issues over a public event, Vetri Maaran said, “Reality is awkward. And that awkwardness is equated to a threat by the censor.”

“When cinema talks about a caste, power or politics, it gets louder with censorship. While silence is always non-threatening, the truth has never been,” wrote Pa Ranjith on his social media page recently.

On responding to censorship issues over 'Jana Nayagan' and 'Parasakthi', Kamal Haasan wrote on his social media, “Cinema is not mere art; it is a reflection of the world. If the reflection is distorted, it is clearly because the truth is hidden.”

A continuing debate on art and regulation

Censorship isn’t really about curbing artistic expression; it’s about regulating societal equilibrium. However, the distinction between regulation and limitation is often subjective when it comes to motion pictures that cover real-life socio-political issues. From 'Kuttrapathirikai' and 'Gypsy' to even more recent films like 'Jana Nayagan' and 'Parasakthi', the censors in Tamil cinema remain a contentious issue that invariably raises the question of authority. What’s intriguing here is finding that ideal ‘voice’ between censorship and art, the middle ground between public consciousness and that artistic integrity that gives cinema its relevance and its responsibility to culture and society. As boundaries get tested, the discussion around censorship and its impact on cinematic voice will continue to make waves.