Are filmmakers being silenced by Arbitrary Censorship?

Recent actions by the Central Board of Film Certification (CBFC) have ignited a debate about censorship in Indian cinema and its impact on filmmakers' creative freedom.

Recent CBFC actions spark debate on censorship in Indian cinema. The board demanded changes to 'Janaki V/S State of Kerala' due to the protagonist's name. 'Sitaare Zameen Par' faced alterations, including political messaging. These incidents raise concerns about artistic freedom. Upcoming films on sensitive topics may face similar scrutiny. The CBFC's role in creative decisions is under question.

In a nation that constitutionally protects freedom of speech and artistic expression, recent interventions by the CBFC have triggered concerns about the scope of censorship and its effect on the creative liberties of Indian filmmakers. Cases involving "Janaki V/S State of Kerala" and "Sitaare Zameen Par" illustrate a worrying trend: creators are being pressured to make alterations based on political and religious considerations to secure clearance for their films.

Controversy Over a Name

The Malayalam courtroom drama "Janaki V/S State of Kerala," starring Anupama Parameswaran and Union Minister Suresh Gopi, faced unexpected obstacles when its censor clearance was withheld shortly before its scheduled release on June 27. The reason cited was the protagonist's name, Janaki, considered by the CBFC to be an inappropriate reference to Goddess Sita, as the character was portrayed as a victim of assault.

This decision, communicated without formal written notice, sparked immediate criticism. B Unnikrishnan, General Secretary of FEFKA (Film Employees Federation of Kerala), questioned the logic, asking whether any Hindu names derived from deities would face similar restrictions. He also pointed out that his own telefilm, featuring a character named Janaki, had previously received CBFC approval.

Similar situations have arisen before. Director M B Padmakumar encountered resistance concerning a character named Janaki in his film "Token Number." The CBFC suggested alternatives like "Jayanti" or "Krishnan," names lacking the perceived divine association, and only approved the film once the change was made.

Micro-Management of Creative Choices

While "Janaki V/S State of Kerala" highlights religious sensitivities, the CBFC's handling of "Sitaare Zameen Par," featuring Aamir Khan and Genelia Deshmukh, reveals the increasing influence of political agendas on creative decisions.

According to Bollywood Hungama, the film was reviewed by a Revising Committee headed by Vaman Kendre after the Examining Committee suggested changes. The committee recommended the following:

• Replacing "Businesswoman" with "Businessperson".
• Replacing “Michael Jackson” with “Lovebirds.”
• Removing a visual element related to the word “Kamal” (perceived as a reference to the lotus, the BJP party symbol).
• Adding a quote by Prime Minister Narendra Modi after the opening disclaimer.

These demands raise concerns about the CBFC's role in shaping political messaging within fictional narratives. The inclusion of a quote from a sitting prime minister appears to be an imposition of ideology.

Despite these interventions, "Sitaare Zameen Par" was eventually granted a U/A 13+ certificate and released on June 20. However, questions remain about the impact on artistic freedom.

Silencing Certain Narratives?

The increasing instances of interference raise concerns about the potential for similar scrutiny for upcoming films exploring sensitive mythological or historical subjects.

Nitesh Tiwari’s "Ramayana," starring Ranbir Kapoor and Sai Pallavi, serves as an example. The Ramayana's narrative complexity includes emotionally charged sequences, such as Sita's abduction, her trial by fire, and her eventual abandonment. These events are central to the story and deeply rooted in Indian culture.

Will the CBFC object to the depiction of Sita’s trials? Will they argue that portraying her as a victim undermines her divinity? If using a name like Janaki is controversial, what about a film retelling her entire journey, including the injustices she endured?

These are not hypothetical concerns but real issues in the current sociopolitical environment, where identity, religion, and ideology intersect. As Satyajit Ray said, “Cinema’s job is not to provide answers, but to ask the right questions.” It is essential for the CBFC to remember this principle.