Well that was the first reaction I had when I heard a so called intellectual whose credentials were nothing more than that he was a celebrity. As has already been said years ago "Free lunch is yet to be invented" same goes for self censorship.
People simply try to push the boundary of the ecosystem they are in. When the system revolts back then they come to know that they have crossed the boundaries or else they continue in their disgusting manner. Then there was one more "intellectual" who said "let us rate the Indian Hindi Movies and let the people decide what to see and what to avoid". That made me laugh my hats off. It was so much similar to one of the Scott Adams Dilbert strip. In the strip Dilbert tells Dogbert that he feels guilty about working for a company which makes doughnuts which have thousands of calories. Dogbert says that you do not force anyone to eat it, you simply make them irresistible.
Here also in the rating system we are not "forcing" anyone to see our movies but by giving them XXX rating we are making them irresistible. One more thing in one of the Dilbert strip was when Dogbert says human beings are fun searching parasites and will do any thing for it. Whether that is in their favour or not, does not really matter to them. On the same line people will go to watch this XXX rated movies knowing that it might not be too well for their moral health. But people making these kinds of movies have mastered the art of "Human being is attracted towards forbidden". So once you XXX rate them you are essentially making them forbidden and hence more attractive for the buyers. Its simple voyeuristic economy and a shame.
Moreover the logic of "let the people decide" is a frivolous one. If people were so intelligent and honest we would not see so many crimes taking place. People would know what to do and what not to do. So we would not have any legal laws then. Let the rapist decide whether raping is correct or not. Gosh!! gimme a break will you.
One more issue is "who decides what is wrong and what is right in media". Now by this logic no limits can be put on anything. Anyone can happily say I am making a porn movie, who decides its right or wrong. In ancient time it was the king and his court which used to decide. Similarly in modern world someone needs to take initiative to decide what is wrong and what is right, inside a legal system. The problem is when moral decline creeps into the system we silently acquiesce to it and want "someone" to take matter in his hand. People appreciated what is shown in the movie Rang De Basanti. That the youth take control in their own hands for justice. Now again who decides whether they did right or wrong. Going by the public opinion they seem to have done right but as per law they were criminals. Similarly when Shiv Sena tries to protest the celebration of Valentines Day all the jhola chaap journalist who are pseudo apologists of "freedom of expression" jump the bandwagon saying who decides whether celebrating Valentines Day is right or wrong. I am not endorsing what Shiv Sena does what I am trying to explain is that "who decides" does not always work. Someone has to take the initiative and wrath of the public opinion. Remember if all objections to something are addressed that thing can never be implemented.
People simply try to push the boundary of the ecosystem they are in. When the system revolts back then they come to know that they have crossed the boundaries or else they continue in their disgusting manner. Then there was one more "intellectual" who said "let us rate the Indian Hindi Movies and let the people decide what to see and what to avoid". That made me laugh my hats off. It was so much similar to one of the Scott Adams Dilbert strip. In the strip Dilbert tells Dogbert that he feels guilty about working for a company which makes doughnuts which have thousands of calories. Dogbert says that you do not force anyone to eat it, you simply make them irresistible.
Here also in the rating system we are not "forcing" anyone to see our movies but by giving them XXX rating we are making them irresistible. One more thing in one of the Dilbert strip was when Dogbert says human beings are fun searching parasites and will do any thing for it. Whether that is in their favour or not, does not really matter to them. On the same line people will go to watch this XXX rated movies knowing that it might not be too well for their moral health. But people making these kinds of movies have mastered the art of "Human being is attracted towards forbidden". So once you XXX rate them you are essentially making them forbidden and hence more attractive for the buyers. Its simple voyeuristic economy and a shame.
Moreover the logic of "let the people decide" is a frivolous one. If people were so intelligent and honest we would not see so many crimes taking place. People would know what to do and what not to do. So we would not have any legal laws then. Let the rapist decide whether raping is correct or not. Gosh!! gimme a break will you.
One more issue is "who decides what is wrong and what is right in media". Now by this logic no limits can be put on anything. Anyone can happily say I am making a porn movie, who decides its right or wrong. In ancient time it was the king and his court which used to decide. Similarly in modern world someone needs to take initiative to decide what is wrong and what is right, inside a legal system. The problem is when moral decline creeps into the system we silently acquiesce to it and want "someone" to take matter in his hand. People appreciated what is shown in the movie Rang De Basanti. That the youth take control in their own hands for justice. Now again who decides whether they did right or wrong. Going by the public opinion they seem to have done right but as per law they were criminals. Similarly when Shiv Sena tries to protest the celebration of Valentines Day all the jhola chaap journalist who are pseudo apologists of "freedom of expression" jump the bandwagon saying who decides whether celebrating Valentines Day is right or wrong. I am not endorsing what Shiv Sena does what I am trying to explain is that "who decides" does not always work. Someone has to take the initiative and wrath of the public opinion. Remember if all objections to something are addressed that thing can never be implemented.
No comments:
Post a Comment