Sense & Sensibilities

Sense & Sensibilities
Shailaja Bajpai

All this talk of Water offending ``the sensibility of the people'' so violently, the UP government was compelled to ban its shoot, has got yours truly, well and truly thinking. The cultural commissars -- who object to everything from a film which deals with the lives of widows to a film which portrays Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi -- justify their violent objections on the grounds that these depictions offend the people's sensibilities. If we extend their (il)logic to television, if we take into account all the TV programmes, channels, advertisements, we would discover enough downright offensive stuff to hurt the feelings of a steel girder. Well...

There will be an empty screen left after we have removed everything which offends, hurts people's sensibilities. Except possibly, Krishi Darshan which assaults and offends our aesthetic sensibilities but aesthetics don't count in the current offensive (!).

To ask what is offensive on television begs the question, what is not? For example (in no logical order):

PTV. Superlatively offensive, it makes the Kargil incursion look tame. It spews hatred like noxious gas from a three-wheeler.

Discovery, National Geographic and Animal Planet: you may not believe it, but these acclaimed channels, hurt many children's feelings on account of an inhuman cruelty to animals. Watch beasty teeth tear through raw, beastly flesh, day after day. Watch animals copulate, day in, day out. When human beings are shown entwined in sexual intercourse, we call it pornography and give it the Water treatment; when lizards and snakes lie coiled around each other in wanton abandon, we call it (sex?) educational television. Offensive.

Fashion TV. Many people feel this channel is more about titbits that bits of cloth. Offensive to all those whose eyeballs square at the sight of scanty clothes and bare breasts (male and female). Stop it. Immediately. That, or tell Yves St.Laurent, Christian Dior, Giorgio Armani and Donatella Versace to design their fall lines in armour.

BBC. It has offended successive governments and people's sensibilities whenever it hasn't told it like we want it told. Remember Mark Tully reporting on the demolition of Babri Masjid in 1992 when he said the Hindus were responsible, as though an entire religion had risen to storm the mosque's domes. Weren't all Hindus outraged, then? Why didn't we drown BBC there and then?

MTV and Channel V. They've been culturally incorrect (and therefore) offensive ever since MTV came calling. People will tell you they have absolutely no redeeming qualities whatsoever. They're killing what's left of Indian culture, they're transforming our children into wild freaks who want to pierce their belly buttons and eyebrows and dress, speak, Grind like Ricky Martin. Hey Ram. And get a hold of the lyrics in the songs: some are so obscene you need to Dettol them before they reach your ears. Offensive is a mild word. Shouldn't we declare that music to our ears, lies in the sounds of silence?

TV Advertising: another baddie. Glossy, catchy, it raises expectations which millions cannot fulfill, promotes a consumer agenda in a country where over 340 million people don't consume enough food and live below the poverty line. Also, supports many lousy programmes. Commodifies women, children and in his own words, film actor Shah Rukh Khan. Isn't that truly offensive?

Women. There's so much which offends women watchers. (That's women watchers and not women watchers as in men who watch women.) One example will suffice: alcohol ads offend the sensibilities of each and every woman who has ever been beaten up by a man after a drunken bout; of each and every woman whose father, husband or live-in male has spent his and/or her hard-earned salary on the bottle.

And we've just begun. Someone hates World Wrestling Federation, another horror shows, a third detests TV violence/obscenity, a fourth has problems with Doordarshan which has become so irrelevant the crores spent on it, is a national shame...

You'll say these examples are ridiculous and intentionally absurd. They are absurd. Just like the violent protests against the films. Should we ban, stop everything `people', some people don't agree with? Haven't we got anything better to do? Television offers one sensible (the word is advisedly used) alternative: exercise self-control. If something or someone offends your sensibilities, don't watch. Switch to another channel, switch off. You achieve twin goals: you see and hear no evil so your sensibilities remain intact, pristine. More significantly, if viewership falls and protest letters come in, the show does not go on. This is a simplistic solution and tends to absolve channels, producers, advertisers of responsibility? Not entirely. The`` people's sensibilities'' are their old friends, public reaction their best buddy. And self control is a beginning.

Laloo Prasad Yadav. Many people say they find him terribly offensive. People in Bihar didn't necessarily agree: they voted for him beyond expectations. When he appeared triumphant on television, Friday night (STAR News), he sent the opposition scurrying for cover. It was a great performance, an unforgettable television moment: one ``hain?'' from him and Govindacharya (BJP) blanched. Yes he did. One invitation to tea, and Govindacharya swallowed as if his saliva had turned to poison. Brilliant.

DD News introduced a new set and its new TV anchors during the assembly election results. Mrinal Pande was good, Rahul Dev looked good but Sunit Tandon was uncomfortable, inadequate and looked both. He needs help like the Congress needs votes. And even then it might not be good enough. For years DD suited and booted people like him into newsreader's clothes. Now it expects him to tandoori politicians and journos like chicken.

Next week: do we need elections, budgets, hijacks boring non-stop for ever on television?