What’s really behind the Padmavati controversy?
Other than the loonies behind physical threats and violence, something just as sinister underpins the feral rage behind the Padmavati film in India and abroad: an underlying narrative for the anti-Hindu narrative propagated by pseudo intellectuals who pine for secularism whilst espousing a distinctly Marxist and Nehruvian retelling of the history of India.
There is mass hysteria in India (and abroad) over a silly film by Sanjay Leela Bhasali but the pain and furore felt by its detractors goes far beyond celluloid. The detractors calling for punishment of the lead actress and the director haven’t even seen the film but that’s not stopping calls for its banning by large sections of the Rajput community and other Hind castes in major states in the northern region in India.
Their central gripe? That the director may have shown Padmini alias Padmavati as responding to Allauddin Khilji’s advances resulting in some romantic scenes on screen — something that would be considered abhorrent and blasphemous by the Hindus.
Whether misplaced or not, the anger can be traced to something far deeper than a mere film. It can be traced to a suspicion amongst Hindus about the new ‘narrative’ of the history of India, particularly medieval history, and how it is being bizarrely rewritten by historians who wear their Marxism and pseudo-secular naivety proudly on their shoulders alongside their bleeding hearts.
These fabrications are extremely commonplace now, from those who espouse the humanity of Tipu Sultan to shouting how ‘secular’ the likes of Aurangzeb was (in fact this megalomaniac was a despot who plundered the holiest of Hindu shrines and inflicted untold cruelty on the Hindu population). What’s bizarre about their attestations is how under a Congress government they had long gone unchallenged. It was part and parcel of the price of independence, for the masses who accept a kind of intellectual dishonesty when in fact many Hindus knew fell well what the truth was.
It was just before the resurgence of the BJP and emergence of Shri Narendra Modi that such views were fashionable.
This leftist retelling of the secular narrative has enjoyed lending itself to literature and cinema in particular, emboldening ‘artists’ to regularly Hindu-bash to their hearts content (Arundhati Roy, MF Husain, to name but a few).
But no more. A saffron pride has burst back onto the scene and it came about because art forms have spread such inaccuracies for far too long And also because historians and intellectual forums have coalesced to combat the dishonest secular narrative.
So what about the film itself? No heroine of Rajasthan has attracted greater attention of poets and writers than Padmini. For centuries, the story of Padmavati has been told and retold to generations of Indians and has been part of school curriculum and story-telling in educational institutions across the land. The Rajputs and other Hindu castes regard Padmavati’s decision to commit Jauhar rather than fall into Khilji’s hands as an act of supreme valour which upholds the honour and dignity of all Indian women. As a result, Padmavati enjoys the status of a “Devi” in the minds of the people.
It’s remarkable given the deification of Padmavati and the sincere belief by many Hindus that she existed, that leftwingers can mock Hindus for revering what they believe to be a made up character straight from Harry Potter.
It’s questionable why Sanjay Leela Bhansali had made no real effort to quell the controversy by making clear that no distortions remain in the film to offend sections of people but what is clear that it is the duty of the Indian state to ensure that Sanjay Leela Bhansali’s fundamental right to freedom of expression is protected and those holding out murderous threats to the film’s director and the actors are dealt with firmly under the law
