Thsi article is excellent. Sumit Bhattacharya has rightly brought out the issue, which some of my reader friends seem to have misunderstood..! The issue is not whether Smoking is good or not (I don't think any fool would support it..!) issue is one of whether the Government has any right to get into every facet of life of you and me...! To that extent, this article is wonderful.
hey, sameer- forget art for a min- mantri ayya is concerned about the popularity of Rajini saar, IF he intends joining politics. this is an effective sabotage method, if possible as Rajni came into the limelight with a cig flick- from fingewr to mouth. Go beyond the smoke screen- the art is safe. And dont worry ovemuch about Churchill- no one in bollywood will ever make a bio on him- and the brits dont have such a ban in their land.
"Art for arts sake", I accept. I would prefer to watch a Shelock Holmes with a cigar between his lips, but that is solely because of the perception that I have about Holmes. But there is much more about smoking in films.
If someone ask any smoker why did he start smoking, the answer that you get from a huge majority is pretty simple: he saw his friends smoke, he saw his heroes smoke, and he thought that smoking is macho. I have not seen any of my friends who started smoking with a different reason.
It is this particular reason that the Government is trying to address. Undoubtedly, it is the films that are the biggest advertising hoardings for the tobacco industry. When a hero or villain fits a cigar into his mouth whenever he does something brave or serious, it is the act of smoking which is glorified. The film industry can afford to spit that cigar out in the cold for sometime, just to make sure that we are honest with ourselves when we say 'Smoking is Injurious to Health'.
We all know that smoking is injurious. Health ministry thinks that the youth that usually ape the styles of bollywood, may also get the attention of smoking. So why make a big deal?
If u still insist on smoking, go smoke. Nobody is stopping u. Just because they are not allowing u to see, doesn't mean ur freedom of expression is in drain.
Now u compare with other countries like US, UK. whatever they are doing etc. If u want to compare that way, also try to match with their following the traffic rules, their work sense and the discipline they show. You've become so impatient nowadays that you've come to a stage where nobody shouldn't say anything to you. If they show u the right direction also, ur freedom of expression is shattered. And I don't understand that....
I'm a youngster and I've no problem with that. If film personalities don't have a problem, whats wrong with others??
The article was a nice read.. I personally do not believe in censorship.. what is the point in having free speech if it is regulated in any way...
coming back to Orwellian big brother schemes of utter and absolute authoritan control over expression of any kind, that is where i see this trend leading...
i think \\\"impressionable young minds\\\" is right up there with fascist hogwash with \\\"national security\\\". What separates man from animals is the gift of reason. It is to be nurtured and not stifled.
RE:Thought Police??
by Saurav Mohapatra on Jul 04, 2005 08:28 AM Permalink
@ french words that was not in correct french... :) nor was it intended to be...
for details watch the South Park movie... watch out for the bit where Stan goes "political and stuff"
i missed a "t" though... in libertie.
@politically correct
my comment was not about quitting smoking or not, but about whether the government has any right to dictate what choices people take in utterly personal matters...
i still believe most of the democratic constitutions in the world separate for example, religious institutions from the state for this very reason...
RE:Thought Police??
by blokes on Jun 29, 2005 07:24 AM Permalink
get ur french right- vive LA liberte et LA resistance- anyways, rather than spouting politically correct ideas that sound cool, get real and quit smoking.
Sumit Bhattacharya is on the wrong rhetoric. Portraying smoking is one thing (it certainly is not "art") but glorification of smoking is absolutely different. All heroes and even villains are shown "enjoying" and "glorifying" smoking. Mahesh Bhatt has admitted in an open debate that films have been indeed glorifying smoking. As smoking not only affects the health of the smoker but also induces youngsters to smoke following their film heroes and also spoils the health of the passive smokers, it deserves to be stopped. Besides, who is paying through the nose for the treatment of dreaded smoke-related diseases- Is Bhattacharya and his ilk doing it? Why cant they welcome a good healthy population in India, sans smoking?
Any media which not only encourages smoking but also gives space to those who oppose ban on smoking cannot be considered doing a healthy journalistic job.
