The Painful Paean that is Padmaavat

So everyone is finally happy that the most controversial film in Bollywood has managed to see the light of day and grab attention even after its tumultuous release. Is this Sanjay Leela Bhansali's best work. No. Will her role as the deified queen seal Deepika Padukone's status as Bollywood queen for posterity? I hardly think so. Was this magnum opus deserving of all the censorship it underwent to please a fractious and irrelevant clan of hooligans who claim to be sworn protectors of a royal dynasty? Absolutely not. And yet, the film seems to have validated its presence in the modern context by going on to win plaudits as well as box office return even while detractors and trolls alike are still attacking the film for all it potrays, honours and stands for.

From the conceptualisation to the characterisation of this film, everything in the making of this film spells problematic from the word go. Why? Because when you do not have enough material to base your historical/mythical story on, it will either fall flat on its face when it comes to creating verisimilitude or come off at the seams, even when you manage to sway the audience with glorified visuals of cinematic splendour. I watched this film in 3D and yet, despite the delicious expanse of its canvas, the film lacked depth, simply because it didn't even try hard to convince the audience that this in fact could be authentic. A film is not meant to be a chapter for history books. It can indulge in fictitiously depicting an age, character or event provided it mentions the same. No one should be looking for authenticity here. For that you have libraries. At the same time, please don't expect a film stuck in a certain orthodox era to enlighten us about feminism and modern outlook. After all, the film never meant to take sides about how jauhar or sati are not acceptable, it merely brought to the fore a previously unseen story about an erstwhile queen who made this inedible choice due to her circumstances and the period she lived in, albeit in the wrong century.

Of course, we cannot go back to that time in order to identify with her but neither can we demand that our generation of millenials buy in to this sort of self-sacrifice in this day and age. So who is the audience this film is trying to appeal to- youngsters who won't flinch to defy their own parents's decisions these days on matters of their lifestyle choices and actually shun marriage as too conventional in this virtual age of Tinder and speed dating? Are they sensitive enough to be moved by the moral conduct and strict norms that women of a long-forgotten century had no choice but to adhere to? Will they be able to identify with her or relate to her from the cushioned lounge seat they are watching the film from? Does the filmmaker engage in coercing us in to abject submission to the film's moral high ground in the garb of honouring a community's ideas of honour, pride and integrity even if it comes at the cost of putting down a gender in its wake? A popular actor's recent diatribe on the film does make you wonder about this and while the makers may argue that this was the queen's choice to end her life and not something that was pushed down her throat, it does make you realise the futility of such debate. What choice do you have when there is really no choice the society offers you by way of women empowerment, liberty, justice and equality?

As for me, I really have other niggling problems with the film viewed purely from the cinematic point of view. I was fairly disappointed to see how wrongly Shahid Kapoor was cast as a noble, enigmatic and powerful Rajput warrior king. The love story between him and the queen looked as superficial as it could get with no real reasons given for why they might have fallen in love. The entire plot unravels like a story outline where gaping cracks are left, jarring the very foundation of the film. The villain's entire coterie gets meatier roles and screen time with Alauddin Khilji being the most author-backed. Minor detailing helps etch out his nature, whims, psyche and aggression. It's almost as if while we are led to believe that we should side with the good, we are constantly being drawn in to the black spider's web of evil, that spins an intricate and believable yarn around us. So besides Khilji, it's Malik Kafur and the rebellious Rajguru who manage to stand out as the strongest roles in the film, a strange pity after all the brouhaha over Rajput valour.

Ranveer Singh bites in to his role with a kind of raw hunger seen in every film he has made with his mentor Sanjay Leela Bhansali till date. He is moody, fanatical, obsessive, crushed, victorious and yet defeated, all at once! Wonder why the only character everyone seems to be praising is that of this ruthless, devious and unscrupulous Sultan of Delhi when it was clearly supposed to be an ode to Rajput glory! No prizes for guessing why Padmaavat therefore takes its audience for a royal ride, sans a solid story, sans the poignancy such a legend deserves and in stead ends up as a gnawing misinterpretation of a beautiful queen whose name gives the tragic tale its title. As a queen who is endowed with a lot beyond mere physical attributes, the film would have us believe that she was sharp-witted, an efficacious ruler with fair discretionary powers of how to manoeuvre a kingdom without its rightful ruler on the throne. As someone who was equally meritorious a warrior as she was a strategic mediator, it is particularly incredible how her only way to confront a more powerful and lustful enemy was by ceasing to exist, and becoming the cause of mass self-immolation. What should have been her war cry becomes a widow's wail, that too for a king who was neither able to protect his queen, nor win his empire through military strength or pre-meditated strategy. Particularly disturbing is the Maharaja's absolute nonchalance at assenting to his wife's plea to commit a heinous crime in the name of honour after his death, it's a nod of approval my husband would give for a cup of tea may be, NOT for a request to end my life to honour his name!

Since I started with a question, let me end this tirade of disappointment with another one. Last heard, a Brahmin group of protestors are now gearing up to seal the gates of release for another historically inspired film, Manikarnika: The Queen of Jhansi starring the oh-so-feminist Kangana Ranaut. Since we have as a nation already gone beyond solving issues of national importance like global climatic change and farmer suicides, we of course have all the time to now engage in fresh debate over whether this film should indeed be cause for controversy or not. I can already see our torch bearers of feminism rising up in arms against the creative liberty that is every filmmaker's right to making a movie. The INR 200 crore worth question therefore is, are our filmmakers shouldering the responsibility of at least convincingly depicting a story on screen for us to uphold it for its merits? Padmaavat failed on both levels, as a film as well as a social comment on its time. Sorry Mr.Bhansali, we gave you a fair chance, but you robbed us of an opportunity to witness and savour a film that was worth our money and your effort.

The Pihu Diary: Cutie on Duty

As parents, you forever want to protect your kids from all kinds of disasters and catastrophes. It means we are naturally conditioned towards wondering if we are feeding them right, whether the texture of the clothes they wear is not giving them a rash, whether they are warm enough during winters and not likely to catch the chill, whether they can be left to walk alone without tripping on the stairs and so on. So what happens when the tables are turned and you suddenly have a three year old kid voluntarily deciding that she is as much an authority on all decisions taken daily? It means there will be power battles, ego clashes and tantrums galore.

So Pihu has honed caretaking skills a bit earlier than we would have expected her to. I'm supposed to hold still till she has rolled up my pyjamas to the right length to step in to the bathroom to give her a bath. If my hair is loose and I am unintentionally running my fingers through them, it means a hair grooming session is the need of the hour. Out come her accessories carefully picked out of my dresser- a hair brush, two combs and a hair band. This is followed by an imaginary massage, shampoo and combing session until she is sure 'I look like a doll'. Dressing up for an occasion means getting a good look-through my wardrobe to suggest exactly what will look good on me. This is accompanied by a complete review of my appearance and a nod of approval which is gratefully received by yours truly what with the pressure of constantly matching up to Pihu's exacting standards.

She already has a personal sense of style you see. Tight-fitting pants that taper off towards the ankles are the rage. Bell bottoms, flared pants and loose-fitting denims are passe and best relegated to the back shelves of her wardrobe. She even has her own unique way of wearing her winter shoes with the flaps jutting out when she boots up, for a more flamboyant swag. Weddings and parties mean she must wear a dress, just as she wouldn't be caught dead in the cardigans she wears to school once she is back. Night wear must include comfortable pyjamas with a soft sweater that doesn't itch in places. Labels jutting out on the nape of the neck or at the bottom of a shirt must be nicked off and the bottoms of all her pants must touch her ankle or get rejected as being too short.

My daughter has also developed quite a taste for fine dining and does not approve of restaurants that do not have baby chairs available as she insists on sitting levelled against the table with all the adults. A napkin must be handy at all times to wipe soiled fingers and the table clean off any crumbs or curry spill while eating. Trust Pihu to point out any stain or left-over on the floor or table in order to maintain high levels of hygiene. I can almost see her turn in to a very hard-to-please mother-in-law already!

Playing games with Pihu translate in to a clear hierarchy of who is to be obeyed and who is to lead. A game after all must have rules and that automatically means she has to set them so lesser mortals like us can follow.

A stickler for discipline occasionally, shoes must be kept back in their place and one must change in to home wear after coming in from an outing so as to not 'dirty the good clothes.' Any errors in speech are also not forgiven, so you will quickly be corrected on saying 'tum' in Hindi as it is not respectable enough. One must say 'aap' and not indulge in 'gandi baat'. Since she is picking up Hindi and Bengali simultaneously at home, she will often cajole her dad in to speaking in Bengali, knowing he doesn't speak the tongue almost as if she is pulling his leg! Talk about getting bullied by kids. Her dad of course humours her by replying in Bengali just for fun.

When it comes to parenthood, never did we quite imagine a toddler to take on the garb of a meticulous and diligent authority on all things prim and proper. Don't ask me when the coin flipped but it does look like we are really not the only ones carrying the baton of responsible parenting when it comes to Pihu.