Padmavati Scandal is Proof of Slow Death of Creativity in India

Creative expression has been under attack for a while, soon we may have to stop expecting ‘bold’ films.

Freedom of speech and expression in India stands at the precipice of great danger, as does the future of creative genius. While controversies and pre-release publicity is common to those in show business, the furore caused over this film is something its lead actors might term as an ‘occupational hazard’ of sorts.

The film is based on the heroic tale of Queen Padmavati who, by the practice of self-immolation or ‘jauhar’, saved her honour instead of succumbing to the despicable desires of King Alauddin Khilji.

Also Read: Can We Stop Glorifying Padmavati For Choosing Honour Over Life?

The incident, that has been successful in igniting many a debate among historians, has now left the Censor Board, the film industry, and just about everyone else perplexed. Rajasthan’s Rajputs, who for months protested the release of the film on account of alleged disparagement and mutilation of historic facts and the "character" of the historic queen, have now been joined by right-wing organisations in other states.

The situation has grown so violent that the film’s lead actress, Deepika Padukone, now has round-the-clock security at her residence.

For most, this situation would only mean a delay in viewing a big-budget Bollywood film. What is more alarming, however, is the suppression of creative expression, which has become a recurring issue in India, as indicated through incidents such as this one. Ironically, the Constitution of India entitles each individual to the freedom of speech and expression.

While this right is subject to certain reasonable restrictions, it is aimed at facilitating the healthy expression of the opinions, ideas and artistic sensibilities of the people.

Unfortunately, however, creative expression is languishing in the garb of these “reasonable restrictions” that are being endlessly cited by not only by the Censor Board but also ordinary citizens.

Also Read: What Is Jauhar and Why Did Rajput Queens Do It?

Attack on Fundamental Rights

Those who oppose the right to creative expression when it comes to cinema may argue that the Supreme Court itself has acknowledged in the past the ability of such artistic work to move the viewer.

Turning a blind eye to the possible chaos would, then, be irresponsible. While this argument supports the generally accepted set of reasonable restrictions levied, what such a precedent fails to set is a threshold on what constitutes as “moving enough” to stir such profound emotions among the public.

While it is understandable that the people of Rajasthan may have to be dealt with in a more sensitive manner, considering their association with the story, it is baffling to see other state governments entertaining requests to ban the film altogether.

The individuality and autonomy to think, create, and make choices freely, that our Constitution guarantees, are being unfairly compromised by entertaining such requests.

Also Read: So, Did Rani Padmavati Really Exist?

The Politicisation of Art

The Supreme Court of India, on 20 November, declined to entertain a petition filed to lodge criminal complaints against the producers of 'Padmavati’ on the grounds that such discourse was premature since the film is yet to receive certification.

Further, political parties chose to use the scandal to further their own propaganda, digressing from the larger void requiring immediate address – the legislative and judicial lacunae.

For years, iconic films and artworks have been banned due to the religious, social and cultural sentiments being hurt of those essentially constituting minor political groups.

The debate, instead, must seek to formulate a solution that establishes a threshold to identify situations that can be classified as being against public order and sentiment.

Also Read: Rani Padmavati: History or Poetic Imagination?

If this vicious cycle continues, filmmakers may stop making bold, cutting-edge cinema due to the fear of undesirable consequences.

The Shreya Singhal vs Union of India judgment was celebrated because it put an end to such fears. Do we need to wait for another decade for history to repeat itself in order to see India rise above this archaic value-system it currently allows itself to thrive in?

(With inputs from Firstpost, Live Law, Indian Constitutional Law and Philosophy.)

(The writer is a 4th year student at National Law University, Jodhpur, who wants to pursue litigation. This is a personal blog and the views expressed above are the author’s own. The Quint neither endorses nor is responsible for the same.)

(Breathe In, Breathe Out: Are you finding it tough to breathe polluted air? Join hands with FIT to find #PollutionKaSolution. Send in your suggestions to [e-mail] or WhatsApp @ [phone])