|
|
Pornography
– Certification Vs Censorship
It's
like the proverbial bad penny that simply won't go away. Pornography
permeates all media and the recent debate on its ban or its regulation has
yielded no easy answers. Last month, the newly-appointed Chairperson of
the Central Board of Film Certification (CBFC) -- the Censor Board --
well-known film director Vijay Anand disclosed that the Kerala regional
board of certification had proposed screening pornographic films in select
theatres in an attempt to 'save' mainstream cinema in the state.
But even before Anand could put the suggestion before a core committee to
deliberate on over 50 suggestions to revamp the Censor Board, he resigned,
holding as unacceptable the Central government's directive not to discuss
any such proposals.
The new incumbent to the post of chairperson, Arvind Trivedi (television
actor and former BJP MP), told this writer: "I am completely against the
proposal. It is against our culture and does not reflect nicely on our
society." Not merely porn, Trivedi is against any depiction of sexuality.
"I am not against kissing if it is necessary," he said. Asked when he
would consider kissing 'necessary', he said, "Kissing could be deemed
necessary in scenes between a mother-daughter or brother-sister. But
scenes of closeness or expressions of love between a woman and man would
be
unacceptable, as the moral boundaries imposed by society must be
respected."
Anand himself is clear about porn: "I would hate this kind of cinema." He
had examined the issue purely as a management exercise. "As chairperson of
the Censor Board, we have to consider all the suggestions that come to us.
But I resigned as the government said we must not discuss the issue."
The Censor Board was in favor of discussing the Kerala board's suggestion
only insofar as is could help save mainstream cinema, he asserted. A huge
number of films are made in Bollywood, 2100 of which received a Censor
Board certificate last year. Plagued by a series of flops despite the
money
poured in, the industry is desperate to get audiences back into the
theatres. Industry watchers say the sex films industry has eaten into its
audiences and profits. In several parts of the country, film producers
routinely shoot two versions of a film, one with explicit sex scenes and
another that is more regular and acceptable to the Censor Board.
In some places, more commonly in small cinema houses in satellite towns
across the country, theatre owners interpolate 'sexually explicit' scenes
into films certified for public viewing. In Sangli (Maharashtra) for
instance, a theatre showing the English film, 'An Officer and a
Gentleman',
suddenly began screening sex scenes. Journalist Vasant Bhosale said, "The
actors were obviously foreign and so was the locale. They had no
connection with the story and the sequence went on for 15 to 20 minutes.
We were startled, but others in the audience hardly reacted. Obviously,
this was a
common occurrence."
The experience put off Bhosale and others from venturing out to see an
English film, indirectly bolstering the argument of the Kerala film
producers and others that porn films are better off in select theatres.
"These films are killing the real business of cinema," said Anand, adding
that the process of film certification needs to be more stringent.
Producers who apply for certification of these films will be scared stiff
because their films can be released only in 50 theatres across the
country,
Anand said. He even had a plan for appointing nine detective agencies for
each of the nine regional censor boards to ensure spot checks on theatres
and fines for violators.
Indeed, the problem is a complex one. On the one hand, there is the issue
of porn -- soft or hard-core. Such films, DVDs, VCDs, cassettes and print
material are smuggled into the country, clearly violating the laws
governing possession and distribution of what is termed 'obscene'
material.
Section 292 of the Indian Penal Code terms as 'obscene' anything that is
'lascivious or prurient' and therefore likely to disturb moral sentiments.
The Rajiv Gandhi government passed the Indecent Representation of Women
Act 1989 to cover visual material -- widely seen as an attempt to
establish its reputation as a pro-women government.
The Cinematography Act of 1952 is supposed to ensure that 'healthy
entertainment' is provided for citizens, and it has numerous guidelines
governing the depiction of sexuality. In 1975-76, the G D Khosla Committee
report recommended that 'kissing and nudity be shown on Indian screens
provided these are shown aesthetically'.
However, all these pieces of legislation have suffered implementation
problems largely due to the vague and uncertain definition of prurience or
indecency. Obscenity itself has been debated at length, and liberals and
puritans have been at odds about the influence of changing cultures and
mores in society on these concepts.
By the 1980s, the resurgence in the women's movement brought in another
dimension to the debate: that pornography as opposed to erotica was
demeaning and derogatory to women. That pornography was sexually explicit,
sexist and violent depiction of women, mainly as victims and as objects of
titillation, and that an organized industry spawned a huge and
sophisticated market for pornography. That the profits being made from the
manufacture and sale of pornographic material ultimately contributed to
the destruction of the rights and self-respect of women.
Activist and writer Nandita Gandhi who works with Akshara, a Mumbai-based
women's library and resource centre, asserts that the arguments in favor
of making pornography more accessible have not contributed to the
reduction of sexual violence anywhere. Pornography grossly violates the
rights of human beings to deal with one another on an equal and
non-exploitative manner. Puritanism, she felt, could not be viewed in
opposition to pornography either.
"There is a sea change on the entire issue of censorship," says film
critic Maithili Rao, adding that India must explore the efficacy of
certification with more effective policing and enforcement. Porn is an
issue that needs wider debate not limited to the film industry, but
drawing upon the perceptions of educators, teacher-parent organizations,
psychologists and others.
The lack of sufficient figures on the spread of porn, and of porn material
at video parlors, cyber cafes or cable television channels is a handicap.
Media literacy, she stressed, was a vital element in aiding both children
and adults to deal with such imagery. "Education is the only way out and
unfortunately, we don't introduce it even to college students, leave alone
schools," she rued.
A majority in the film industry shares Anand's view on certification as
opposed to censorship. Indeed, the film industry's reaction to the entire
controversy over porn films has focused not on the issue of porn films as
such, but on the issue of censorship.
Amit Khanna, President of the Film Producers' Guild of India says, "Porn
films are a non-issue for me. I have no problems with them, but I am not
interested in them. I think the Kerala Board's suggestion was more in the
nature of introducing a new category of film classification to cover
'adult' films and I am definitely in favor of it." Censorship, he
reiterated, had a negative function in 21st century society and was
repugnant to independence.
 The
Censor Board, as it exists, can be effective only if one talks of
regulation, not control, surmises well-known film director Shyam Benegal.
"There is some virtue in the suggestion of the Kerala Board. In any case,
it is a minor issue. What's the big deal about pornography?" In official
circles, he says, there is a great deal of confusion between erotica and
pornography, the former being contextual. Humans have an interest in
different kinds of prurient pleasures and as individuals, they have to
find a way to deal with it.
"Has porn taken over the world? Are Indians cretins or what?" asks Shyam
Benegal, inferring that clamping down on porn was an assumption that
Indian audiences were not treated as mature and discerning. Instead of
concerning ourselves with pornography, one must be exercised about things
that destroy one's self-esteem, he feels.
In a nutshell, this is what the debate has been reduced to -- morality and
censorship versus permissiveness and liberalism. The space for sexuality
that is passionate, non-exploitative and beautiful is still a dream.
– Geeta Seshu
August 11, 2002
By arrangement with
Womens Feature Service
Top
|
|
