IMMEDIATE ABOLITION OF THE SEDITION LAW IN INDIA

It was August, 1909. Lord Minto, Viceroy of India, decided it was necessary now for “ measures to be taken for the suppression of sedition”. The archived Records of the Government of India says he sent out letters to the Princely states to suppress the “disaffected people” who dared criticize the British government in India. 

Over a hundred years later, the word ‘sedition’ is still doing the rounds in an elected democracy where people form the political sovereign. The British in 1870, the colonial rulers as they were, felt the need to criminalize the disaffection towards a government by force. But its continuance in an elected democracy is absurd because the people without resorting to any sort of violence can remove a government in the next elections. Thus the term sedition and Section 124A stand in direct contrast to the right to free expression and speech enshrined in the preamble and article 19 of the Indian Constitution.

As the Delhi police commissioner said and we all agree, "There is an urgent need to expand the scope of the law on sedition. It needs to be rewritten to remove all scope of ambiguity so that citizens have no doubt about what constitutes an anti-national act”.

But I say neither expansion nor clarification is required, rather the law itself should simply be abolished like it has been in most modern democracies around the world. The law of sedition was abolished in the UK in 2009. Former colony New Zealand got rid of the law earlier in 2007. In the US, the courts constantly criticize the “chilling effect” of the sedition law on free speech.

Let us now take a look at this little statute which divided and united a country at the same time. Section 124A of the 156-year-old Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC), that defines who is a seditionist or “anti-national”:

“ Whoever by words, either spoken or written, or by signs, or by visual representation, or otherwise brings or  attempts to bring into hatred or contempt or excites or attempts to excite disaffection towards the government established by law in India, shall be punished.”

Sedition can even condemn one to a lifetime behind bars. So we conclude that the law states any individual who stands against any government policy or questions any action of the state he or she is punishable by law. So if that be the idea that the state must never be questioned, what then is the idea of democracy? What kind of a democracy doesn’t allow the freedom to question the State? This is the largest democracy of the world yet successive governments have used this law with impunity.

On February 9, a group of students from Delhi's Jawaharlal Nehru University had allegedly raised “anti-India” slogans to mark the anniversary of the controversial hanging of Afzal Guru. On February 13, Kanhaiya Kumar, the JNUSU president was accused of sedition and arrested, soon followed by the arrest of seven others. What began as a minor clash between two student groups in one of India's premier educational institutions has now morphed into a debate of what is and what isn't national and who decides that. So here we are, in the age of Make in India, Digital India and Skill India, debating how ‘Indian’ we are, who is really  ‘Indian’ and what makes us un-Indian. Amidst all the terror attacks and constant threats from alien sources, the economic and social dilemmas that the country faces, and all the larger games afoot,  do we really need another war to tear us apart? And that too over all things, ironically,  patriotism?

Author : Utsa Ghosh 

Black Hermoine: Stupefying Racistic Barriers

Harry Potter arguably overwhelms the largest fandom in Hollywood and it's latest upcoming west-end play 'Harry Potter and the Cursed Child' has cast it's wizardry upon the fans around the globe already. Interestingly, in December 2015 it was announced that Noma Dumezweni had been cast to play Hermione Granger in the play. She is a Laurence Olivier Award winner, presented for excellence in professional theater in London. Although, Rowling has previously said herself multiple times that the books never indicated what skin complexion many of the characters are having, and so this incarnation of Hermione is just as accurate as Emma Watson or any other imagining of her, the casting of Noma Dumezweni as Hermione in the theatre adaptation, Harry Potter and the Cursed Child, has delighted many fans and infuriated others.

                                                'So why a black Hermoine?'

Well, why not? In the Harry Potter books, the brilliant Hermione Granger is described as having frizzy, untamable dark hair, brown eyes, and protruding teeth, but more often is defined by her intellect and devotion to her friends. So even though she was played by the wonderful Emma Watson in eight massively popular Harry Potter movies, why shouldn’t Hermione be depicted as black?
Rowling’s books were always clearly aware of the magic world’s version of racism, and even eugenics, where wizards of “pure” blood were seen by some to be superior, and “mud bloods” like Hermione had to fight against prejudice. So making Hermione a woman of color isn’t just O.K. based on the book’s description; it makes even more sense given what her character goes through. Let’s face it, on Broadway eventually—it will be a chance to see a whole new side of a character they thought they already knew. How often does something that magical happen?

Ronald Weasley, Hermoine Granger, and Rose Granger from
the sets of "Harry Potter and the Cursed Child"

The writer of this series. J.K.Rowling was apparently overjoyed with the new casting of Hermoine Granger. She tweeted :- "Canon: Brown eyes, frizzy hair, and very clever. White skin was never specified. Rowling loves black Hermoine. :* "

The very fact that, actors like, Sir Sidney Poitier, Bill Cosby, Danny Glover, Morgan Freeman, Eddie Murphy, Whoopie Goldberg, Halle Berry, Angela Bassett and so on have given added colour in their own way to this affluent industry we all crave for, (and they are all black!) shows that it's not a situation out of place but it's your minds which are. Such racistic approach and prejudice have impaired the people in general from the fascination that's hidden in the world. In simple terms, people who are obstinate about the change are missing out to discern the diversity in the play. So, you either realize the meaning that the character brings out or sulk in your bigotry!

All the best Noma! Cast your like no wizard ever could! 

All you need to know about the "BREXIT"

What is Brexit?Have you heard about the term 'Bremain' or 'Lexit'?

No? Not to worry.The following article will help you get the basic understanding,even if you are a dummy.

WHY IS BRITAIN EVEN HAVING A EU REFERENDUM?

Back in the last general elections that was apparently projecting a Conservative defeat,the then Prime Minister David Cameron assured his countrymen that he would hold a referendum whether his country will stay within the EU or not,in case he became the Prime Minister for a second term.

Why did he do so? Apparently,the British counterpart of Donald Trump, minus a billion dollar empire and the lunacy, Nigel Farage (leader of the United Kingdom Independence Party,dubbed as UKIP) was leading a campaign of xenophobia and hate politics. In order to tackle Farage and his co.,Cameron promised holding a EU referendum. More than three years after Cameron unveiled his strategy to reform Europe and put it to a referendum, Britain has voted to leave and the Prime Minister has resigned.

WHAT DO WE MEAN BY THE TERMS 'BREXIT' AND 'LEXIT'?

Decoding the terms used during the referendum doesn't utilize more than a couple of brain cells.

    'BREXIT' stands for Britain's EXIT from the European Union and talks about a broader mass. It puts forward the argument of closing the borders, not allowing the illegal migration of thousands. It also opposes the terms and conditions put forward by the EU. Britain sends the EU 350 million pounds a week. They believe that money can be utilized for reforming the services in their own country.

    'BREMAIN' stands for Britain's REMAIN in the European Union. It puts forward the argument that for every one pound sent to the EU,Britain gets back 10 in the form of investments and jobs.They believe that a better,reformed Europe is possible and the change needs to be brought from within.

    'LEXIT' stands for the Left Wing's idea of an EXIT from the European Union. It puts forward the argument that the policies of the EU are extremely right wing and neo-liberal. Almost zero job security and myopic workers' rights are the main reasons cited by this camp. Basically,the camp wants to build a socialist nation from within, outside the jurisdiction of a right wing force.

Now that we have a basic idea of the referendum, let us see who led the three campaigns.

    BREXIT: Although many Conservative and right wing politicans have led a case for Britain's Exit from the European Union, the main credits go to MP Boris Johnson of the Conservative Party and Nigel Farage, leader of the United Kingdom Independence Party.

    BREMAIN: This campaign was led by various fronts, but not as an united front. The Prime Minister  David Cameron and Chancellor George Osborne, of the Conservative party were leading the campaign on one hand. On the other hand,Jeremy Corbyn (Leader of the Labour Party), John McDonell (Shadow Chancellor), Gordon Brown (ex Labour Prime Minister) and the infamous Tony Blair (responsible for starting the Iraq War) were leading it on the other hand. Interesting to note is, Jeremy Corbyn never shared a stage with any Conservative politican or his Blairite colleagues, thus reaffirming his character.

Jeremy Corbynn

    LEXIT: Many socialists and communists, along with hard left Labour MPs, were leading the Lexit campaign. This campaign was mostly managed by MP Alex Gordon and MP George Galloway. It also had the backbone support of MP Dennis Skinner (The classiest 85 year old man to live on Planet Earth).


BRITAIN HAS CHOSEN 'BREXIT'/'LEXIT',WHATEVER YOU WOULD LIKE TO CALL IT.BUT WHAT IS GOING TO HAPPEN NOW?


It is the greatest disaster to befall the block in its 59-year history. The road ahead is unclear. No state has left the European Union before, and the rules for exit  – contained in Article 50 of the Treaty of Lisbon – are brief. Mr Cameron resigned as Prime Minister shortly after 8am, announcing that he thinks Britain should have a new Prime Minister in his place by the start of the Conservative conference in October.  He will leave the task of triggering Article 50 to his successor. The EU's leadership has demanded Britain activate Article 50 exit talks "as soon as possible" as they attempt to end the uncertainty over the bloc, "however painful that process may be".

President Tusk, President Schulz and Prime Minister Rutte met this morning in Brussels upon the invitation of European Commission President Juncker.

"Any delay would unnecessarily prolong uncertainty. We have rules to deal with this in an orderly way. Article 50 of the Treaty on European Union sets out the procedure to be followed if a Member State decides to leave the European Union," the official statement said."We stand ready to launch negotiations swiftly with the United Kingdom regarding the terms and conditions of its withdrawal from the European Union."

Mario Draghi, the president of the European Central Bank, has said it is ready to intervene to steady the markets. Central bankers from Japan to Switzerland have also offered to step in to provide additional liquidity - a measure not seen since the financial crisis.

On Saturday, the foreign ministers of the founding six member states – France, Germany, the Netherlands, Luxembourg, Italy and Belgium – will meet to discuss the implications of the British vote.

• David Cameron will next see his counterparts at a European Council summit on Tuesday and Wednesday next week.

• The deal, struck after months of negotiation last summer, has evaporated under a ‘self-destruct’ clause.

• He will be under intense pressure to activate Article 50 and commence exit negotiations. Leaders do not want to be drawn into months and years of haggling over Britain’s status: “Out is out,” Jean-Claude Juncker said on Wednesday.

• Article 50 – and a new deal

• Triggering Article 50, formally notifying the intention to withdraw, starts a two-year clock running. After that, the Treaties that govern membership no longer apply to Britain.  The terms of exit will be negotiated between Britain’s 27 counterparts, and each will have a veto over the conditions.

• It will also be subject to ratification in national parliaments, meaning, for example, that Belgian MPs could stymie the entire process.

• Two vast negotiating teams will be created, far larger than those seen in the British renegotiation. The EU side is likely to be headed by one of the current Commissioners.

• Untying Britain from the old membership is the easy bit. Harder would be agreeing to a new trading relationship, establishing what tariffs and other barriers to entry are permitted, and agreeing on obligations such as free movement. Such a process, EU leaders claim, could take another five years.

British Prime Minister David Cameron resigned after
Brexit results.

HOW LONG WOULD IT TAKE TO LEAVE THE EU?

It would take a minimum of two years for the UK to leave the EU. During that time Britain would continue to abide by EU treaties and laws - however it would not take part in any decision making.


WHAT WILL HAPPEN DURING THAT TIME?

The UK would have to thrash out the terms of its departure. Issues would include what financial regulations would still apply to the City of London, trade tariffs and movement rights of EU citizens and UK nationals. The agreement would have to be ratified both by the European council and the parliament in Strasbourg.


HOW WOULD BREXIT IMPACT THE EU?

Some people in the EU community believe that Britain quitting its membership could encourage other nations to follow suit with referendums of their own - or demand tailor-made deals of their own.

WHAT HAS HAPPENED ALREADY?

Britain has already lost 172 billion pounds over a single night,the pound has reached a new low since 1984,magnanimous job cuts are expected and trade investments are likely to fall sharply.

The real effects of Brexit will be visible after a couple of years.Whether it will be for a better Britain or a worse one,will be the question of the hour .For all we know,2016 is going to be a marked date in our sons' and daughters' history books.


Article by :- Saptarshi Majumder.

Top 10 Places in Kolkata

With the torture of the sun reducing with every passing day, people coming down to this city of joy who are looking for a place to hangout, well here I am with my suggestions. Unlike the other articles showing the cultural side and the rich heritage of itellectuals hub, I am here with some off beat places to 'chill'.

1. Dhakuria Lake
One of the cleanest and freshest places in the city, this place is perfect for a romantic evening. No matter how sunny the day this, entering the gates of Dhakuria Lake, you would just be welcoming a sack of oxygen and eyeful of greenery. What is even better, is that this place is actually well maintained by the govt .and is also easily accessible. So the next time you are looking for a natural retreat, Dhakuria lake is the place you'd want to be in.



2. Jadavpur University Worldview
Now, amidst all the revolutionary minds, the budding engineers, the artsy stoners and the arguing intellectuals, Worldview is a place for ultimate chill, or as the city calls it, 'lyadh'. Unlike the crazy side produced on media, JU ambience is overly welcoming. The place where sharey teen (a three legged dog) and don (the dogfather) greets you with their constant tail wagging and puppy face. The ranges of topic discussed varies from political scenario, literature discussion, sports, music scenes and topping it all, jamming sessions.



3. Ahiritola Ghat
Now, the last two places named were somewhat modern, but here is Ahiritola Ghat. With other ghats being beautified with blue and white paints, new artworks etc, this place was left ignored. That, that is the plus point. The old world charm is enough to give you the chills. Indian Renaissance paintings on walls, Babas and localities busy smoking grass. This place is the apt place for jotting down new poems and songs. Also, number of boats and ferries cross the ganga and drop you off at Howrah, and
that ride is something no one should miss.



4. Tibetian Delight
Looking for a homely surrounding with decent fooding? Tibetian Delight in Rabinda Sadan is your answer. Aunty makes amazing momos and if you're lucky, you might just get to hear stories from her about her childhood and struggles. Keeping our in-city cuisine aside, a Calcuttan enjoys street Chinese the most. Now add good vibes to it, Tibetian Delight is the place to be.



5. Paramount Cafe
Boasting about holding revolutionary minds and being the oldest juice joint in the city, Paramount Cafe was one of its kind when it opened doors amidst the caffe and tea cebtered adda minds. Sherbet will never taste the same after a drink at Paramount. Visited by college students mostly, this is a must on a street foodie's list.



6. Lawn on Sudder Street
Now, all these places were all amazing. All beautiful and good vibes. But now, this place, this place is my favourite in the city. A hipster place holding jams, freestyle rap sessions and of course, lyadh. The most essential thing, lyadh is at it's ultimate. Oh and, to all the save floating minds, yes this place is all chill about lighting up the doobie and having a good time.



7. Momo I Am
Well, here I am dealing with extremities. This Chinese joint near Lords' is  a place buzzing with youngsters of all kinds. Especially those looking for a rather less expensive date with good music and amazing street vibe. With the owner being one of the biggest intiators of the Kolkata graffiti scene, the walls are nothing less than a New York street side. And the food, this is one of those places where quality is given top priority. Also, for the selfieholics out there, it is a pretty sick place for urban backgrounds.



8. Lake Gardens Warehouse
Right under the flyover, this worn out warehouse is the budding place for the young skaters, graffiti artist, dancers and cyclists. With the whole warehouse and surrounding walls painted with colourful and contrasting graffiti, this place is the closest that you can get to European subways. An amazing place for hanging around, getting good pictures clicked, working on your hobbies, this place is all about chill and stability. Mainly visited by youngsters this place is also great for an evening walk.

9. Princep Ghat
Yes, I had to name this place. Let's face, atleast once you have wanted to visit this place Be it just out of curiosity or even for a new profile picture clicked by pseudo photographer friend zoned guy. Princep Ghat is one of the most romantic places you'll ever be in Calcutta. With the Ganges showing off her beauty and lush green grass, this place is the more urban and adaptive version of grounds Tagore and Ray used to write about. And here is a tip, if you land up there ever with your girl, don't forget to take a walk till Esplanade. One of the best walks in the city



10. Esplanade to College Street tram ride
Now now, calm down. I know what you're thinking, this is it. The best of the best. It is like one of those things which you have to do when you're in Kolkata. A tram ride is necessity. And why the Esplanade to College Street ride? Because I prefer the transition you get to see, the modern to the old Calcutta. As eye candy as it is,  no matter which route you choose, a Kolkata tram ride will always be hearted.



So yes, this is the list of top 10 places to chill in Kolkata. To better addas and modern youth gatherings, this is for all the lost teenagers looking for a place to chill. Or, with the current weather, lying down at your place with good music and good people around you is also acceptable. Cheers!


AUTHOR-
Jyotishika Paul

MOVIE REVIEW: RAMAN RAGHAV 2.0

Straight from Cannes Film Festival  2016 :- 

Raman Raghav 2.0 is a love story. Now, you might think, the guy is out of his mind because that is hardly a conclusion one would draw after the trailer and in-your-face-it's-terribly-violent-film promotions. But Anurag Kashyap isn't a man known for subtleties, so he made things obvious in the film title itself  'Raman Raghav', like you know, 'Romeo Juliet', only this is not your ideal daily dose of romance.


'This film is NOT about him', says the title card at the beginning of the film, after giving you a brief biography about the notorious serial killer from 60's Bombay, indicating the Auteur is here to have some fun. And immediately, 10 mins into the film you are right into the atypical world, intricately crafted by Kashyap's kitsch and the gritty premise of an electrifying, nerve-bending night-club sequence, where the predator(read one of our lovers) lures his prey(the newcomer Sobhita Dhulipala) into his vicious circle of nose-powder and viagra. Well, he is Vicky Kaushal, the cop aka Raghav, who you think is your Hero but he isn't.


He is pretty much the mirror image of the notorious mass murderer, Raman a.k.a Nawazuddin Siddiqui. With a footlong scar in his forehead and piercing sinister eyes he is 'God's own CCTV camera', or so he calls himself. From killing his own sister and wearing her earrings and then treating himself to a chicken dinner in the very apartment he murdered the whole family, to non-chalantly discussing his murdering prowess with random strangers from the street, Raman is absolutely menacing as the scarily delusional, yet enticing psychotic killer on the spree! But then, he is also a hopeless romantic and hence he wishes to pass on his philosophy of killing (just for the purity of it, without any cause-effect relation) to Raghav, who he sees as his fellow comrade or simply as the other side of the same coin. So, it is the journey of Raman making sense to Raghav's inner conscience and thus propelling Raghav to take it forward which looks like a great premise for a sequel.

And that is basically the plot or maybe the lack of it. In spite of being predictable, extremely genre-specific, and almost sans any detailing of female characters (no variations, often mistreated which again might be intentional going by his previous works), Raman Raghav works mainly because of Nawazuddin Siddiqui's unmatched performance that fetched him a standing ovation at Cannes and Anurag Kashyap's handling of the grotesque and the innate ambiguity of human characters. From Black Friday-esque chase sequences and uncannily funny interrogation scenes, to charred heroes, multi-location narrative, to bombastic use of music, Raman Raghav is Kashyap's familiar territory, a place he had made his own over the years. Though Vicky Kaushal looks alright for the confused lawman, he is the weak link when it comes to his turn of mirror-imaging of what Nawaz is doing at complete ease: The Gratuitous Violence.



So there might be two possible audience outcomes from the film. One, the maddening Kashyap fanatics who would absolutely thrive on it, (especially after Bombay Velvet) and the other kind, who'd feel this is a 'safe' Anurag Kashyap film where he hasn't done anything revolutionary or out of the ordinary. I am however, stuck somewhere in between.





About Abhiroop Basu  :-





Abhiroop Basu is a independent filmmaker, and a graduate from St.Xavier's college Kolkata. His film "Afternoon with Julia" had an official selection at the Cannes short film corner this year. Another film of his "The Day after Tomorrow" has won multiple awards throughout the country.

Is India truly ours?

                     

                                 

Isn’t it notable that, when we are small, our surroundings seem so big to us? Perhaps due to our short stature, our eyes imagine that our world- and the people making up our world- are big. But, with age and the series of experiences that enrich our minds, that once huge, magnificent world becomes ridiculously small, almost trivial. And the people we encounter- save those who unconditionally love us- appear to be meaner and narrow-minded in aspect.

The same can be said about the attitude towards the State. As children, we are given the Impression that we live in a country that is “ours”, that is ruled by “us” by the “free will” of the people, and “we” bear the ultimate sovereign power. Little by little, by (un)conscious indoctrination and propaganda both in the society and in our educational syllabuses, we are led to believe that India is a great country for which people shed the very last drop of their blood; but ultimately, all credit goes to Gandhi and Nehru. No mention is made of the Revolutionaries (who were active in the 1920s and early 30s); nor of Bhagat Singh, Rajguru and Sukh Dev- and, by extension, the entire Hindustan Socialist Republican Association; little mention is made of the Swarajists and their brief but significant contributions; and the Royal Indian Naval Mutiny of 1946 hardly makes an appearance. Even Bose, whose heroic struggle demands attention, is left out. And we have to deal with the (almost) pro-Congress line that Gandhi, and Gandhi alone, was able to lead the Congress to win India’s independence!

Some, and that is to say, most of us don’t really care about the discrepancies in the histo-graphical narrative regarding India’s independence. As it is, education in India is for the sake of getting your hands on a high-salaried job either in a multi-national corporation or in the government. As long as we have our easy-going lives, no one would care about what we are taught or what happens to the people around you hereafter. Rarely and very rarely, comes a person or a group who delve deep and ponder on issues that others may deem it as unnecessary. Time would tell that whether I belong to those fortunate few. But in the twenty years of my life that I have lived, I think I have earned the right to ask just a single question:

Is India truly ours?

The answer is simply a string of complications, like some titanic ball of yarn. Like frogs in a well, most of us would only look on to the entangled lines that make up our world, our very lives and most of us would be happy with that, even contented. And then, who would even take the trouble to realize that what one knows holds dear, is nothing more than a big lie, in Orwellian proportions? Orwell spoke of an orthodoxy, and such an orthodoxy can be best described in the terms of the Matrix Trilogy. Our lives, our ideals, our rights are nothing more than a simulation, a make-believe ingrained into your head since childhood, almost hammered into place. And most of us would be happy with a wooden placard hammered into our minds, making us believe that India is “ours”, “we” rule India.

So I ask again:


Is India truly ours?

When the simulation ends, when the veil lifts, you will be in denial at first. Most would reject this realization as another lie, probably made for selfish political ends. Some would come to terms with the truth, some won’t. And those who reconcile to the truth, will echo my question:

Is India truly ours?

We find ourselves alienated, almost pushed out of the psychological state of blindly believing that India is ours. We are strangers, so to speak. Now a new question takes root in our minds:
If we do not rule India, then who does?

India belongs, first, to those who actually believe “India” and “Hindu” are synonymously interchangeable. They equate national life with the spiritual life within Hinduism. They believe that only Hindus are permitted to the land because their holy-sites are in the Subcontinent. India primarily belongs to those folks who think Hindus are some kind of Nazi Herrenvolk and others are the Untermensch (inferior).

Next, India belongs to the rich, upper classes, the tycoons of finance capital and industry. Their real and sole motive is profit and monetary gain, and they ruthlessly exploit the large masses of workers- especially in the private sector. Whether you sit in front of a computer or an ordinary cement-mixer, they (the corporate) won’t care about you. Like tissue paper, they will use you and then throw you away. Any kind of philanthropy or social obligatory work that they do is a mere public-relations stunt. And these rich blokes often offer support to the people, described above.

And these two, whether inside or outside the government, are successful in creating the third type of people to whom India belongs to- the people who think that India “belongs” to them.

 Ladies and gentlemen, I present to you India, their India.


Article by :- Anush Ghosh.





Disclaimer : The views presented in the article is that of the author's. The organisation's viewpoint shouldn't be confused with the same.

Orlando: A Night of Terror

Forty-nine people died dancing. Well, they did not exactly dance to their last breath. There was terror, panic, pain in the end. But minutes before, they had danced, kissed, engaged in amorous activities, sexual activities.



By now everyone knows about the gunman who opened fire upon forty nine people at a gay nightclub. It is easy to speculate a kind of backstory to the attacker. We can assume he was a radical, a mad fanatic. His crime was directed against people of the LGBT community. He was enraged at the sight of two men kissing. Yet, he availed gay dating apps, is suspected to have been gay himself. What was his terror directed against, then? People who could own up to their sexuality which he himself could not? People satisfactorily in love? People who accepted themselves? People he could not be, and hence whom he hated? It can be speculated that Omar Mateen's act of terror was actually terror that spilled out from within himself- terror, the bite of which his own heart felt.

Because the worst of human beings cannot escape this affliction- the presence of this pulsating thing called the heart.

The people who died at the nightclub died moments after dancing. They were happy in that moment. One of them had been Snapchatting. Omar Mateen, on the other hand, died after he had spilled blood, consumed perhaps by his own hatred.



The world lost happy lovers. Their death was wrong, undeserved, untimely. Their loved ones lost loved ones and there can be no pain greater than that. But right now, I can think of one- just the one.

And that is the pain of being Omar Mateen. The pain of being the perpetrator of crime as grave as this. It is the pain of every terrorist, every murderer. It is the pain of the people who disrupt lives, sever bonds, stop hearts, spill crimson across dancefloors. It is also their own blood they spill. They are always on a suicide mission. It is their own souls that they destroy in the process. While thousands mourn the loss of innocent lives, let us also mourn the presence of the outstanding burden of blind hatred that looms over our society. This hatred has no cause, no reason, no logic- just a deep, ancient root. Let us mourn the spurring of Omar Mateens by our society.



Again, like everything, it starts with the individual. It starts with one simple "You faggot!"

I've had friends in this very city that have been called names, teased, bullied. It's the same story, nothing you haven't heard before. It is commonplace, so that the harrowing details may only bore the average reader. I won't look for novel ways to express that oppression. If the recent incident has not already shocked you, my words will not manage to do the job.

I have one question to ask the readers. If you are homophobic, or "weirded out" by gay people, or scared that one of them of the same gender as you might flirt with you (oh, the horror of being flirted with), I have one thing to tell you: there is one thing in common between phobia, hatred, condemnation. They are all like a two-way pistol, one end of which invariably points towards the perpetrator's heart.

With condemning Omar Mateen, we ourselves burn for the kind of violence we have all made possible. I have made it possible. You have made it possible.

While our Prime Minister sheds tears over the kind of violence that his own country reinforces under his own rule, I have one question to ask my fellow inhabitants of Kolkata. Are YOU gay in the City of Joy?




- SHAONI S.

Lights. Camera. Cannes

                 
               "There are two kinds of people, one who drink Espresso, and the rest!"

His movie is a homage to the long gone era of Parisian Utopia. A symphonic ode to the state of existence, romantics, cinephiles, and lovers want to be in. For the cinephiles specifically, the French New Wave Era of directors has been romanticised by many, while many have drawn inspiration from it. Abhiroop Basu falls into that list. A movie abundant in Truffaut's, Godard's and other French directors' references is the product of it. As a topic, it's neither preachy, nor a very introspective one. But a simple regular conversation between two lovers, Anthony played by Samadarshi Dutta, and Julia, played by Neha Panda, where they share their respective illusions about life, and their deepest fantasies. Ample references from Jules et Jim, Band of Outsiders and the Red Baloon have ornamented this movie, and one cannot skip the reference to  Woody Allen's classic "Midnight in Paris" when Julia talks about that crazy night where she stood in front of Trinca's waiting for her Uttam Kumar to take her out for a romantic ride, but was mistaken for a whore by two hippies, and asked to accompany them. Much like the movie where the French innovation, the fourth wall, has been conveniently broken, at the end of the movie its quite hard to distinguish yourself from reality of the characters portrayed in the movie, and the neat jump cuts, have been more than just successful in this case.

The essence of a short film is felt much after the film has actually ended. That's the harmony the camera wishes to strike, and Abhiroop Basu's film "Afternoon with Julia" will leave you at your wit's end gasping for an emotion to react with. The director's love for cinema, has intertwined with his love for Paris quite subtly because you know,


      "What's Paris without cinema, and cinema without Paris?"

Neha Panda and Samadarshi Dutta from the sets of
"Afternoon with Julia"

Q: Who is your favourite director among the New Wave lot?

I love Truffaut, and Resnais. But then it has to be Godard. If you look at the person, his stylistic changes, and the daring attempts he made, was path breaking. Every film of his has something different to offer us cinematically. Has to be Godard, any day.



Q: Some critics say that Godard's influence is going down by the day, he is losing his appeal. What would be your take on that?

Although, I do not personally feel any levity in such arguments, I do happen to know certain critics and cinephiles who feel Godard's implementations are a tad bit unnecessary to a certain level. I believe someone has to do that constant experimentation. Someone has to innovate, and change things continuously so that we get something new every time we go for a movie. Godard is that director. In a world full of filmmakers who're contented with their safe zones, we always need a Godard.


Q: Why does French New Wave appeal to you so much?

One word. The audacity.
Francois Truffaut made "Jules Et Jim" in 1962. That says it all.



Q: Where did you draw this concept about "Afternoon with Julia"?

Samadarshi Dutta, and Abhiroop Basu (right) from the sets of
"Afternoon with Julia"

Everyone is so fast these days, even when it comes to love. You go out with a person for a few days, it doesn't appeal to you and you start dating someone else. People are so judgemental these days. If one listens to Honey Singh, he/she is crass, and if one wears a kurta and flaunts a cigarette while talking about Camus and Sartre, he/she becomes a pseudo-intellectual. My point was to go back to that age where the characters were free. In a world, where people weren't so judgemental about every action you take. A film about two people, lovers or acquaintances, we don't know, just two people who are fond of each other, two cinephiles who'd just talk..talk about Paris, Godard, life and illusions! And that's how the film should begin and end, just a conversation.

              .  "We are a part of this dream, as a part of this grand illusion that is life."



Q: Tell us about your trip to Cannes?

Cannes was... oh! (GASPS), An experience of a lifetime, yes! I never thought I would be able to reach this point, even while I was making this film. I was in awe of Cannes,! It's an Utopian dream. Cannes is THE place for fashion. Everyone looks like a Hollywood star, dressed in their best. And as a matter of fact, everyone is dressed in their best, always! Day and Night! The best thing about Cannes is probably their hospitality. Everywhere you go, anywhere you go.. be it a cafe or just random streets, people will always greet you and help you if you need anything! They are very approachable people, who love the fact that you are there. That's the vibe I got in Cannes.

Q: The most breathtaking moment?

There was this movie "Cinema Travellers", which was selected for the "Cine Classic" section, a documentary, by Shirley Abraham and Amit Madheshiya which went on to win the Special Jury Cannes Award. You do realise how big a thing this is, I hope? So after the screening they were invited to speak, and in front of the audience Shirley broke down into tears. I still have goosebumps whenever I think about it, and you know, I could relate to every emotion she went through while making this film. I started crying myself. I could feel the efforts that she had put into this movie, and this is why we make films, to be there in that platform. I have barely seen such good movies, and this is the only movie after "Cinema Paradiso" which moved me so much. Although it's pretty disappointing to see such paltry media coverage about it.


Q: So how was being in Paris finally like?

Well I think my illusion about Paris was a better one than what it is in reality. The very first day I landed there, someone robbed me off 200 Euros. But yes, I loved the place. The city has an essence of its own.

Q: You met Nawazuddin Siddiqui, Anurag Kashyap and Q over there? How did the interaction go?

Nawaz Sir is a very calm and composed character. I didn't talk to him much. Anurag Sir,on the other hand,is one of the coolest and sweetest person I have ever come across. He's really funny and witty.
The very first thing he told me was, "Now that Cannes has happened. Forget it and start afresh."
 His insights into the film business was a revelation for me. Q is again one of the sweetest guys I have ever met. Honestly, you can't locate this person with the eminent filmmaker that he is.

Anurag Kashyap and Abhiroop Basu, as a part of the panel meet

Abhiroop Basu with Nawazuddin Siddiqui at Cannes.

Q: How did you approach Neha Panda and Samadarshi Dutta for the movie?


Neha was quite impressed with my movie "The Day after Tomorrow" (click on the text to watch the movie), and when I approached her with the script, she became interested in the project. When I read it out, the interest was only confirmed. I happen to be friends with someone who knows Samadarshi da. Ironically, he had never been in a short movie prior to this, and I doubt he'll ever be so in the future.  Both of them were very cooperative as soon as they heard the script.

Neha Panda and Samadarshi Dutta from the sets of
"Afternoon with Julia".

34 years of Communist Violence in Bengal

 Schrödinger's cat - heard of it? Not all of us are aware of the quantum mechanics but we all know the paradox. The cat in the box is alive and dead simultaneously. 19th of May, 2016, left Bengal in such a paradox. People were expecting the verdict and were simultaneously surprised by it. The defeat of the Congress-CPI(M) alliance was under scrutiny. In some ways, the defeat was greater than the victory. And there was more to it than the combustible mix of ideologies. After a remarkable turnaround in 2011 at the Writer’s (the then WB Govt. Headquarters), the state had a lot of expectations from the Mamata Banerjee – led TMC government. The people of West Bengal wanted to see better days for themselves. Better than what had been served to them in the previous 34 years.

There's a saying which claims that at a certain point, every person is a leftist. But while Communist preachers have been very vocal about the ill effects of capitalism and the totalitarian regime it follows, communist regimes all over the world have meant a mass destruction of human and civil rights. The proletariat dictatorship, has set a benchmark for being a one-man dictatorship, rather than an utopian world of equality.  Digging into why communism kills, one would refer to the Manifesto where Marx states:

“You must, therefore, confess that by "individual" you mean no other person than the bourgeois, than the middle-class owner of property. This person must indeed, be swept out of the way, and made impossible. (Published by Progress Publishers, Moscow, 1973 edition, page 66).”

What is seemingly a metaphor was taken far too literally by communist leaders all around the world, including Stalin and Mao Zedong. Marx’s reference to an economic transition ended up being an excuse for centuries of inexcusable genocides.

The infamous Mao Zedong

Though, ironically, the above reference has almost no connection to the following discussion of communist violence in Bengal. I think it has everything to do with the greed and intoxication of power, more than anything else.The lethal communist violence had been surging in West Bengal since the early 1970s, way before the Communist Party of India came to power.

The March 1970 incident of Sainbari runs a chill down the spine every time one thinks about it. Two brothers who were Congress leaders in the district of Burdwan were murdered. But that is not where the brutality ended. The CPI-M cadres responsible, then forced the mother of the Sain brothers to eat rice that was drenched in the blood of her own sons. A teacher who had come to their place on that unfortunate day was also killed and later the cadres had taken procession of the whole house. The mother of the slain brothers had degraded to a state of mental imbalance till her death a decade later. So the look of astonishment on the faces of elders were justified as they saw Buddhadeb Bhattacharya and Rahul Gandhi sharing the same garland (ironically) before the polls this year. It seemed that they either don’t remember their history too well or aren't bother much about it.

In 1982, 17 Ananda Margi monks were charred to death  and many others were severely injured, on their way to an educational conference at the Tiljala centre. They were pulled out of their taxis on Bijon Setu and set on fire alive by CPI-M cadres. It was a follow-up act on a string of attacks on the Marga starting from 1967 where 5 monks were murdered in the institution headquarters in Purulia. What do the CPI-M party owe their angst against the Ananda Marga? Because ideologically they oppose communism and follow what is known as neo-humanism. Though ideally, they are also against capitalism, the violence against the Ananda Margis was something that the then ruling party felt strongly about. After the incident, a mandatory inquiry commission was set up but nothing further happened to deliver proper justice. No report of action, not even a single hearing. Instead in their defence, party candidates said that the whole attack was framed by the Margis themselves to vandalise the government. Then Chief Minister Jyoti Basu was quoted infamously saying, “What can be done? Such things do happen”.

The independence war of Bangladesh induced a steady inflow of refugees until 1978. The refugee policy changed drastically just at the whim of a government after the communist party came to power in 1977. Even though no government assistance was sought but only the permission to settle on the lands of the Union of India, the still-struggling refugees and the inflowing ones in the area of Marichjhapi in the Sunderban terrains faced an economic blockade. Little children died of green diarrhoea due to lack of drinking water. There were also cases of  abduction and molestation with the ruling party cadres and officials. Then one morning of January 1979 saw tear gas and bullets fired by the government forces claiming a number of lives – a number still unknown since many bodies disappeared after the attack. The wounds are still afresh in the hearts of many because seeing your daughter or husband being shot and watch them die helplessly in front of your eyes is not something that someone forgets. One does not forget the torture in the hands of their protector, the state.

In July, 2000, 11 Muslim labourers were mercilessly killed in Nanoor by the goons of the CPI-M party, the “harmad bahini”, because they were supporters of the opposition party. Practically without soil, they opposed the illegal encroaching of their lands. All the accused cadres in this case never faced the turmoil of a trial which was anything but accidental. Instead the ‘harmad bahini’ did only get stronger to spread terror in Bengal and use the killings as an example of the fate of anyone opposing the party.

A victim during the Nandigram violence.

A more recent history which is still fresh in our minds was the 2007 Nandigram massacre. An eleven month long struggle for survival. Tireless fighting against a government on the mission to industrialize at the cost of anything. A time that saw the death of farmers as well as the dream of progress. Villagers of 100 villages fought over 27,000 acres of land that was their sole source of living. A violent struggle for the land that Buddhadeb Bhattacharya had promised the TATA Industries for the production of Nano, without the proper consent of its inhibitors. It was a state of constant conflict and tension, an almost civil-war like situation where the Trinamool Congress found their grounds as they stood up with the people of Nandigram that protested. After an attack from about 250 CPI-M cadres, six farmers died. With ongoing protests and the farmers blocking the SEZ marked area, the government sent police forces onto the field on March 14. Unofficially the forces were accompanied by 400 CPI-M cadres and in the clash with the protesting farmers, 14 of them died according to official records though more than 100 went missing. But there was no remorse on the part of the government. Bhattacharya, the then Chief-Minister, quite surprisingly said that the protestors (farmers and TMC) had been paid back with their own coin, trying to make it all sound very justifiable. Soon enough the issue was forgotten and Nandigram became a battleground of political games which marked the beginning of the change that West Bengal would bring upon itself four years later in 2011.

Some of us thought that the Narada-Sharada scams would restore a way for the leftists into the state this time but having lived through the “sottor saal” or the “dreaded seventies”, and further on under the terrorising communist reign in Bengal, it's difficult to put your faith in a party which has been plundering basic human rights back when the social media wasn't this "cool". It's a pity that ideologies like socialism and the abolition of class demarcation have been percolated down to a one-man reign of terror. That's not what communism is, and will never be! Don't let a single party fool you. CPI(M) or the CPR are mere parties, Communism is a belief.




Article by :- Sucharita Ganguly.

Need to Criminalize Marital Rape in India

Did you know, my country is a woman, worshiped like a deity draped in her symbolic elegant tri-colour. She's a woman of purest beliefs and all things strength and valor. Did you know that a woman in India is the equivalent to the human form of a Goddess? Did you know? The biggest irony that my country slams at my face, is that, half its people take a sadistic, gruesome pleasure in torturing their "goddesses"?



        This shouldn't even make you gasp. Why? Well, you and I are among those who conveniently ignore and continue to worship their Goddesses. Harrowing? Heart breaking? I'll run out of epithets but for each epithet I fall short of, somewhere, in this country, a 'Goddess'  will be brutally stripped off her purity and pride ; forced, and deprived of her free will. 'Rape'  is a small description you see, it's something you and I view as an act of insanity driven, carnal, unforgivable misbehaviour, more often than not in public eye. A crime, committed against some unknown face, her mistake? Well she has a vagina, a feminine built and happened to be at the wrong place in the wrong time.



          Have you spared a thought about the others? The other half of India that is perhaps subject to the same fate, just behind closed doors, by a face she was entrusted to depend on for the rest of her life? Well yes, I am talking about marital rape. So you gasped here? Why? How could that happen? Well, it does and that is the sad reality. By definition, you and I are not even allowed near a Goddess, without her permission. Then there are those slaves to shallow thinking and primal insanity who have an audacity to consider women as mere possessions, more of 'What they own'  and not a significant other or a wife.



          I'll just add to your horror, there probably isn't any legal action for such severe acts of hidden crime, she is 'married'  to that 'man',you know. So he practically owns her, has the right to enforce himself on her, as and when he likes. So what is our 'Goddesses' to do? She can't possibly bolt and run from her vows now, she's the one things are expected of, so each morning she'll put up the radiant smile and a near perfect display of tranquility when inside, her soul is on the look out for the first opportunity to flee before she is made to die again at night. There is society, she can't complain, she chose to marry who she did. Isn't  there a law either? She has no help to seek, because, the majority, consisting of you and I never thought 'husbands'  would need to be bound under such laws. The significant other you know.



              Hence, you don't criminalize marital rape, you just throw my Goddess to a pit, in the den of a vicious predator, ready to be killed bit by bit for the rest of her life and I'll leave you to this while you debate about to do or not to do. While you are at this though, do look up the statistics of marital rape in India. You are an Indian and you see, your country is a deity, dropped in her elegant tri-colour.



AUTHOR:-
Rinita Das

The Surrealists : An Absorbing Misnomer

The Surrealists

 From the house of: The Nautanki Company

 Written and Directed by: Tejodipto Panda

 I would like to start with how the director has been smart to name the play “The Surrealists” but not mention its genre anywhere. It wasn’t mentioned during the pre production promotions or by the emcee before the play began. A smart move indeed, because that controversy can be avoided this time, unlike Mind Duck where it was clearly mentioned by the Director that it was a “theatre of the absurd”, and it was evidently not so. The audience gave mixed reviews after the show. Some said Bravo to the amount of controversial terms and matters discussed courageously while others said “it did not work for me”. And as a reviewer, that confused me even more. I am not a seasoned reviewer yet, maybe that is the reason behind the confusion. Also, if you’re looking for the plot of the play, let me remind you that I am not summarizing It for you, I am going to review it.

Personally, the play worked for me in some places and in some places it didn’t. Suramya Pushan Dasgupta and Tejodipto Panda’s chemistry was delightful on stage (already waiting for Carcinogen to be staged in July for the very same reason). The whole cast of the Tughlaq boomed on stage. Reference to a real incident of Einstein visiting a city in Bengal and not getting an audience needs to be applauded. Be it Pradipta De, Nirvan Chaudhury or Rahamat Ali or the rest – the chemistry of the court was mind blowing. But someone who unexpectedly shocked everyone in the audience was Sayantani Mukhopadhyay. And I am not talking about the correct grammar, I am talking about her powerful stage presence. From mellow to stormy – she portrayed it all. Jeshika Kedia’s portrayal of Sarah Fatima and her imitation of Little Comrade Sarah’s diction on stage was, as we put it these days, ‘on point’.

However, it felt terrible when her fellow comrade lost her voice onstage leading to loss of coordination during the slogans. The magic of the moment was stolen by that one unplanned mishap. However, it can be forgiven. Also, I must harp on the fact that the entire plotline appeared to be very disorganized at times, and certain sub-plots seemed absolutely out of place. Certain humorous plot-twists and punchlines seemed farcical and slapstick, but on the whole, the entire play did evoke a certain amount of laughter. The wonderful usage of spot lighting must be mentioned and the burst of light while exposing the real story behind Rohith Vemula’s institutional murder and the satirical rap poetry in voiceover worked wonders. Accidentally, the play moved along the lines of Third Theatre more than any other genre, which was more or less, a bit scruffy.

The reviewer only hopes that if and when The Surrealists is restaged, The Nautanki Company would sort the scenes out and play around a little more with the storyline to connect the plots – owing to the genre not being mentioned specifically as Surrealism. And if at all it is meant to be a Surreal play, one must delete the magic realism involved in the plot.

Event reported by :- Priyadarshini Mukherjee.

Pictures by :-   Syzygy Productions
                     
                        Calcutta Cacophony

                        Sourya Chakraborty.