Padmavati is not the first film to face hurdles for supposedly hurting Rajput sentiments.
The anti-Padmavati movement across the country, spearheaded by the Shri Rajput Karni Sena, has gone out of hand, with members of the organisation issuing death threats to the film's director Sanjay Leela Bhansali. Leading lady Deepika Padukone has not been spared either, with the Shri Rajput Karni Sena branding her as "naachnewali" and threatening to chop off her nose. Deepika has just been provided a special security cover after these threats.
The bone of contention is the alleged demeaning of the honour of Rani Padmini by incorporating a romantic dream sequence between her and Alauddin Khilji. Sanjay Leela Bhansali and the team of Padmavati have been shouting from the rooftops that no such scene was ever a part of the film's script, but it has fallen on deaf ears.
Padmavati is not the first historical film to face roadblocks. In fact, it is not even the first film with uncertainty looming over its release for hurting Rajput sentiments. Before this, there was Ashutosh Gowariker's Jodhaa Akbar.
The Hrithik Roshan and Aishwarya Rai Bachchan-starrer was under fire for supposedly distorting history. Incidentally, it was the Shri Rajput Karni Sena, who took it upon themselves to be the guardians of Rajput culture and honour there as well.
According to the founder of the organisation, Lokendra Singh Kalvi, Akbar had no wife named Jodhaa. He claimed that Jodhaa Bai was actually the wife of Akbar's son Salim, and thus, the Ashutosh Gowariker film was objectionable. Eventually, Jodhaa Akbar did not see the light of day in Rajasthan.
But Padmavati is no Jodhaa Akbar. The protests against Sanjay Leela Bhansali's period drama are not limited to Rajasthan, they have spread across the nation.
So why does Padmavati matter more to the Rajputs than Jodhaa?
Rani Padmini is deified in Rajput culture and her valour has attained legend status, because of her placing 'honour' above life. To the Rajputs, she proved that, as Deepika Padukone says in the trailer of Padmavati, "Rajputi kangan mein utni hi taqat hai, jitni Rajputi talwar mein."
The Padmini Mahal, where Rani Padmini supposedly lived, is regarded as sacrosanct, and temples and shrines have been built in her memory in Rajasthan. Jodhaa Bai, while revered as a historical figure, has no such cultural significance.
The Rajputs' intense emotion for Rani Padmini comes from anger and hurt. To put it from their perspective, she was a dutiful wife to a brave Rajput king. All was well, till she unwittingly became the object of the uncontrolled lust of a barbaric Muslim plunderer.
The Rajput hero of our story (Maharawal Ratan Singh) fights valiantly till his last breath, but is vanquished by the villain (Alauddin Khilji). The heroine refuses to be 'defiled' and instead, goes beyond her call of duty and embraces death by jumping into a burning pyre.
Needless to say, this is a sore point for the Rajputs. Rani Padmini's pride and honour has been further aggrandised to whitewash the defeat at the hands of Alauddin Khilji. Anyone who dares differ from this narrative will not be spared.
Jodhaa Akbar weaves together a tale of romance between a Hindu princess, Jodhaa Bai, and a Muslim emperor, Akbar, and how they achieve communal harmony. It is not a subject that evokes such strong sentiments as Padmavati does.
There, of course, is the divide along religious lines too. With Padmavati, emotions have been spilling over because how dare a filmmaker show the quintessential Rajput woman dancing in front of men in 'less clothing' and a Muslim barbarian dreaming about romancing her?
Jodhaa Bai, on the other hand, might probably have served as one of the first examples of 'love jihad', a concept that saffron fanatics have been trying to peddle for a few years now. In fact, one can't help but wonder if Jodhaa Akbar would have been allowed to release, had it been made today. Because, how dare a filmmaker show a Hindu princess and a Muslim emperor living in marital bliss?
(Source: India Today)
The anti-Padmavati movement across the country, spearheaded by the Shri Rajput Karni Sena, has gone out of hand, with members of the organisation issuing death threats to the film's director Sanjay Leela Bhansali. Leading lady Deepika Padukone has not been spared either, with the Shri Rajput Karni Sena branding her as "naachnewali" and threatening to chop off her nose. Deepika has just been provided a special security cover after these threats.
The bone of contention is the alleged demeaning of the honour of Rani Padmini by incorporating a romantic dream sequence between her and Alauddin Khilji. Sanjay Leela Bhansali and the team of Padmavati have been shouting from the rooftops that no such scene was ever a part of the film's script, but it has fallen on deaf ears.
Padmavati is not the first historical film to face roadblocks. In fact, it is not even the first film with uncertainty looming over its release for hurting Rajput sentiments. Before this, there was Ashutosh Gowariker's Jodhaa Akbar.
The Hrithik Roshan and Aishwarya Rai Bachchan-starrer was under fire for supposedly distorting history. Incidentally, it was the Shri Rajput Karni Sena, who took it upon themselves to be the guardians of Rajput culture and honour there as well.
According to the founder of the organisation, Lokendra Singh Kalvi, Akbar had no wife named Jodhaa. He claimed that Jodhaa Bai was actually the wife of Akbar's son Salim, and thus, the Ashutosh Gowariker film was objectionable. Eventually, Jodhaa Akbar did not see the light of day in Rajasthan.
But Padmavati is no Jodhaa Akbar. The protests against Sanjay Leela Bhansali's period drama are not limited to Rajasthan, they have spread across the nation.
So why does Padmavati matter more to the Rajputs than Jodhaa?
Rani Padmini is deified in Rajput culture and her valour has attained legend status, because of her placing 'honour' above life. To the Rajputs, she proved that, as Deepika Padukone says in the trailer of Padmavati, "Rajputi kangan mein utni hi taqat hai, jitni Rajputi talwar mein."
The Padmini Mahal, where Rani Padmini supposedly lived, is regarded as sacrosanct, and temples and shrines have been built in her memory in Rajasthan. Jodhaa Bai, while revered as a historical figure, has no such cultural significance.
The Rajputs' intense emotion for Rani Padmini comes from anger and hurt. To put it from their perspective, she was a dutiful wife to a brave Rajput king. All was well, till she unwittingly became the object of the uncontrolled lust of a barbaric Muslim plunderer.
The Rajput hero of our story (Maharawal Ratan Singh) fights valiantly till his last breath, but is vanquished by the villain (Alauddin Khilji). The heroine refuses to be 'defiled' and instead, goes beyond her call of duty and embraces death by jumping into a burning pyre.
Needless to say, this is a sore point for the Rajputs. Rani Padmini's pride and honour has been further aggrandised to whitewash the defeat at the hands of Alauddin Khilji. Anyone who dares differ from this narrative will not be spared.
Jodhaa Akbar weaves together a tale of romance between a Hindu princess, Jodhaa Bai, and a Muslim emperor, Akbar, and how they achieve communal harmony. It is not a subject that evokes such strong sentiments as Padmavati does.
There, of course, is the divide along religious lines too. With Padmavati, emotions have been spilling over because how dare a filmmaker show the quintessential Rajput woman dancing in front of men in 'less clothing' and a Muslim barbarian dreaming about romancing her?
Jodhaa Bai, on the other hand, might probably have served as one of the first examples of 'love jihad', a concept that saffron fanatics have been trying to peddle for a few years now. In fact, one can't help but wonder if Jodhaa Akbar would have been allowed to release, had it been made today. Because, how dare a filmmaker show a Hindu princess and a Muslim emperor living in marital bliss?
(Source: India Today)
No comments:
Post a Comment