Thanks for the article!

On Mon, Mar 2, 2009 at 5:48 PM, Swapnil Bhartiya <arnieswap@...> wrote:

Quite interesting and thought provoking post :-)

I guess, the way producers of The Kite Runners did for the child actors of the movie, Danny is also doing something for the kids:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article-1154667/Boyle-takes-Slumdog-children--film-bosses-pledge-buy-poverty-stricken-families-new-homes.html

He is also setting up funds to help such kids.

As for politicians are concerned, I have very very less regards and respect for them so I will not even mention them, whether it be the Puppet PM or the "?" President or LK Advani.

But, by discouraging celebration for Rahman and Kutty, we are ripping them off from what they have earned.

:-)

Swapnil

It's my personal view and I can be wrong.

On Mon, Mar 2, 2009 at 5:36 PM, Reema Sarwal <reema.sarwal@...> wrote:

Swapnil ji, when did our honourable Pesident become an artist? And does Dr. Manmohan Singh hide a guitar under his hospital bed? And L K Advani dances secretly to Bollywood numbers? :)

On a more serious note, I was pained by the fact that our PM, who takes at least 1 week before he comes out with a public reaction to any event of national importance, made a public statement just a few hours after the award ceremony about India being proud and so on. L K Advani, who could have used the opportunity to at least say -- even if it were mere lip service -- that if he is voted to power he would make sure the slum problem is looked into, also went on about how proud India is... To top it all, the President, whose ticket to becoming the President in the first place was her social activism, also thought it enough to simply go gaga and googoo over proud India.

From these reactions, it doesn't seem that the Indian public and politicians have been sensitized to the situation, however well-made the movie be. Such is the mad craze for Oscars that Indians turn a blind eye to the real problem depicted in the movie -- that's the cause for worry. The frenzy. The mad euphoria.

Besides, this a case of sad miscommunication -- I did not once suggest that the filmmakers take a broom and bucket and clean out the slum toilets for us. Far from it. I did suggest that it would be no less than expected if the filmmakers pay up at least 10 % of the huge revenues generated from the movie to various organisations working for the slums -- that could very easily take care of 1 sq. km. of the slum area. As for the child actors, they were not professional actors to begin with; and it is simply an employer's obligation to see that they get due remuneration.

But most of all, this is about public reaction in India -- if you really get down to it, the celebrations are not so much for Rahman or Kutty's achievements, but simply because "Oscar mil gaya re!" No one is bothered about kyon mila ya kis liye mila.

This is not about activism; it's about being human.

-reema.

On Thu, Feb 26, 2009 at 8:38 AM, Swapnil Bhartiya <arnieswap@...> wrote:

There is a difference between being an activist and being a film
maker/ story teller. Why is Reema ji connecting the two. A story
teller/reporter or a film maker's job is not to judge or to actively
change the situation, his job is to sensitize the situation so that
people can feel some empathy towards those who are in pathetic
situation. As a film maker or as a writer, if I found some thing worth
bringing attention of the masses - for example street children -- I
will write a story or make a film on them. That doesn't mean that I
will go to street and help them -- that is NOT my job. And there is a
saying "jiska kaam ussi ko saje aur kare to danda baje". Second that
is what I do best -- write story or make film. The one who has
contacts with NGO and can manage resources may go ahead and help those
kids. Same is applicable here in case of Slum Dog. Shyam Benegal used
to make sensitive films but that doesn't mean he must put the camera
down and go to street and take up the broom. We need to know the
difference between activism and creativity.

Now, awards. The music and editing has won Oscars -- great job! I
don't know why we Indian's think of ourselves to be left out? Miss
Universe and Miss World was a different phenomenon. You can't compare
Oscars with that, please. Let's pat AR and Kutty for getting India
acknowledged.

But, make no mistake it is NOT an Indian film. But some Indian's has
contributed greatly. So, let's be thankful to those Indians for
earning some respect for us. While we have DONE NOTHING to make India
feel proud. Yes, if one of us can get a Booker or Nobel, then we can
talk. Otherwise, call for no celebration doesn't make any sense.

I repeat. DON"T MIX ART WITH ACTIVISM.

Swapnil

On 2/24/09, CHANDRA MOHAN NAUTIYAL <cmnautiyal@...> wrote:
> Well, those responsible for the slums and not having done enough to change
> things can always take credit.
>
> I agree that this is not the best music by Rehman. But let's understand
> that that's how we got Miss Universe and Miss India- our 350 million strong
> purchasing capacity is weilding the power. There are some other criteria,
> not good to talk about, but international considerations always play a role.
>
> But a fact must be acknowledged that India has been noticed. The highly
> westernised glasses have allowed India to pass through it and be considered.
> Judging poetry in translation is never easy, but is being done. Long back
> Geetanjali did make a mark.
>
> We may take pride in being noticed, though as to reasons, can be lost in the
> noise of JAI HO!
> CMN
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> --- On Tue, 24/2/09, Reema Sarwal <reema.sarwal@...> wrote:
>
> From: Reema Sarwal <reema.sarwal@...>
> Subject: [indiansciencefiction] Please Don't Celebrate
> To: indiansciencefiction@...
> Date: Tuesday, 24 February, 2009, 9:08 AM
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Dear Everyone,
> Today, all the newspapers and News Channels are celebrating the Oscars for
> Slumdog Millionaire. Every celebrity, politician and even the President of
> India has declared that this movie has done India proud? PROUD? Of what?
> It's a Hollywood movie with Mumbai slums as its location. Proud of the
> location? The slums? It makes me sick. Physically.
> Rahman has composed much better music millions of times. Not one politician
> had the courage to say that that soon these slums will be made a thing of
> history by the efforts of the government and the people. Couldn't Rahman use
> the stage of the Oscars when he climbed it to receive the award that he
> would like to take the opportunity to urge the Americans to support the
> Indian struggle against poverty? (Tagore had publicly declared his wish to
> return the Nobel Prize following the British atrocities.)
> Now that the movie has earned so much revenue, is even a miniscule
> percentage to be spent on the slums-dwellers? Can the filmmakers shoulder
> the responsibility of even one square kilometre of slums? Forget about that,
> according to my little information, the child actors have been paid
> something between Rs 35,000 to about 1 lakh. Did child star Radcliff get the
> same amount for Harry Potter?
>
> Hand out some Oscars and sit smug? And let silly Indians go into a frenzy of
> euphoria?
>
> It is my appeal that no one celebrate. Not now. Celebrate after the slums
> are gone.
>
> -Reema.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

> Connect with friends all over the world. Get Yahoo! India Messenger at
> http://in.messenger.yahoo.com/?wm=n/

--
Swapnil Bhartiya
Assistant Editor
EFYTimes.com

*I use GNU Operating System, what do you use? *

--
Swapnil Bhartiya
Assistant Editor
EFYTimes.com

*I use GNU Operating System, what do you use? *