Bans, censorships and more
Then prime minister Indira Gandhi declared Emergency in the country on June 25, 1975, plunging the country into turmoil. And it was not just about politics. The entertainment sector felt the brunt of the long, repressive arm of the state and those who did not toe the line suffered hugely. It was a stand-out 21 months -- Emergency was lifted on March 21, 1977 -- that also saw Dev Anand start his own party, the National Party of India, in protest against the regime. The apolitical star brigade came out in strong support of the Janata Party with artistes such as Pran, Shatrughan Sinha, Pran, Vijay Anand and Danny Denzongpa making their opinion known.
'During the Emergency, the film industry galvanised itself and stood against the government... At least the key people of the film industry had the guts to stand up to the government and say, what are you doing is not right,' film historian and author S M M Ausaja said. In a 2003 interview with Reader's Digest, Dev Anand described how he suffered the consequences of refusing to praise Sanjay Gandhi. His films were banned from being screened on Doordarshan.
The period, Ausaja said, was a big blow to the freedom of expression in the field of cinema. Gulzar's 'Aandhi', starring Sanjeev Kumar and Suchitra Sen as an ambitious woman politician, complete with a white streak in her hair, a' la Indira Gandhi, was released in February but banned in July, soon after Emergency was imposed.
Filmmaker Amrit Nahata's satirical 'Kissa Kursi Ka', which critiqued the people around the then PM, did not make it to the theatres. The negative was destroyed, and its prints confiscated by then Information and Broadcasting minister Shukla, who was close to Indira Gandhi's younger son Sanjay. The movie, a satire about the current political system with the character of Gangaram modelled on Sanjay Gandhi, featured Shabana Azmi, Raj Babbar, Raj Kiran, Utpal Dutt and Manohar Singh. Nahata, who was a member of the ruling Congress but joined the Janata Party after Emergency, remade the movie and released it in 1978. However, this version also faced censorship. 'In Delhi, it was screened at Mavalankar Auditorium. Sanjay Gandhi and VC Shukla saw the movie. After that, the secretary of the I&B ministry told us it will not pass. They said they will ban the movie as it is against the country,' he said.
The legendary Kumar, as famous for his golden voice as for his idiosyncrasies, became a target when he refused to participate in 'Geeton Bhari Shaam' in 1976 to eulogise the Twenty Point Programme of the government. According to 'Kishore Kumar: The Ultimate Biography' by Anirudha Bhattacharjee and Parthiv Dhar, Sanjay Gandhi wanted Kumar to sing jingles in praise of the government and its schemes. And so, he got a call from an I&B ministry official asking him to come to Delhi for the programme. Many attempts were made to convince the singer but to no avail. He was labelled non-cooperative and the government decided to ban his songs from All India Radio and Doordarshan for three months. The year that Emergency was imposed was also the one that saw the release of 'Sholay', 'Deewar', 'Nishant', 'Chupke Chupke', 'Julie' and 'Jai Santoshi Maa'. While many resisted the imposition of Emergency at great personal cost, popular cinema responded by channelling that disenchantment through Amitabh Bachchan's 'Angry Young Man' persona. '... He (Bachchan became an icon because what people could not say in real life, they could see the hero saying it on the screen. That rebellion of the people was epitomised by Amitabh Bachchan. If you look at history, his biggest hits came in between 1975 to 1978,' Ausaja said.
Amrit Gangar, film scholar, curator, author and historian, also called the period 'quite a productive year for Indian cinema... where on one side was 'Aandhi' and on the other was a religious film called 'Jai Santoshi Ma'.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
India.com
7 hours ago
- India.com
Not Mirzapur, not Panchayat, not Gullak, this TV show still reigns with a 9.4 IMDb rating, its name is...
The rise of OTT has changed how India watches stories. You can call it a 'cinema in your pocket' — a moving theatre where both the latest blockbusters and timeless classics play at your convenience. Platforms have found fame mostly through original web series. From Mirzapur and The Family Man to Panchayat, Sacred Games, and Gullak, the list of binge-worthy hits is long — and all enjoy glowing ratings. Yet, buried deep in this streaming race lies a surprise — a decades-old TV show that still beats them all in audience love and critical acclaim. IMDb has stamped it with a score so high, even today's best titles fail to match it. Which show has this unbeatable legacy? The answer takes us back to 1986, when Malgudi Days first aired on Doordarshan. Based on R.K. Narayan's simple yet soul-stirring short stories, this series had a modest start — shot on borrowed funds, carrying the warmth of small-town India. Viewers loved it so deeply that the makers not only recovered every rupee of debt but carved an unshakable place in Indian television history. Behind the lens and the magic The first three seasons were directed by the late Shankar Nag, with the fourth handled by Kavitha Lankesh. The English version had 13 episodes, while the Hindi one stretched to over 50. Season one and two each had 13 episodes, while the final season added 15 more. And the numbers? IMDb rates Malgudi Days at a remarkable 9.4 — higher than Panchayat, Gullak, Mirzapur, or The Family Man. Cast, characters, and more The show's cast was a strong blend of talent — Girish Karnad, Anant Nag, and many more. But the heart of it all was 'Swami,' played by Master Manjunath, whose portrayal of an innocent yet spirited schoolboy became unforgettable. His charm pulled viewers into the slow, tender world of Malgudi. Such was the cultural impact that Indian Railways renamed Karnataka's Arasalu railway station to 'Malgudi Railway Station' as a tribute. The love for this world didn't fade with time. In 2020, a film titled Malgudi Days was released, written and directed by Kishor Moodbidri, and is now streaming on Amazon Prime. But for many, the original TV series remains unmatched — its pace, simplicity, and human warmth offering a sharp contrast to today's high-octane storytelling.
Hindustan Times
8 hours ago
- Hindustan Times
India's past resilience shows the way forward
Peeking into a common citizen's life opens portals to understand a nation's resilience and resolve. So, let's get a glimpse into the life of a common citizen for a better appreciation of India. We'll face challenges in our journey ahead. All we need to do is take a vow to deal with at least one social vice on Independence Day (Bloomberg) The year was 1966. One August afternoon in the city of Mirzapur, the family of a government officer was about to eat lunch when his four-and-a-half-year-old daughter started crying. His six-year-old son followed suit. The red coloured chapatis were the culprit. Their tender age did not stop them from revolting against the foul smell and taste. The wheat we received from the US was meant for poultry feed in that country. Even that was available only to a lucky few. The tribals in Mirzapur survived on scant forest produce. Large parts of India were suffering from a drought that had turned farmland into dust bowls. Records suggest India produced only 72.3 million tonnes of grain in 1965-66. This was the reason Indira Gandhi sought food aid from US president Lyndon B Johnson soon after she became the Prime Minister (PM). In comparison, India is projected to produce 353.95 million tonnes of grain in 2024-25. India's sensational journey from holding a begging bowl to agricultural self-reliance is inspiring and compelling. Indira's predecessor, PM Lal Bahadur Shastri, who led the country during the second Indo-Pak war, coined the slogan 'jai jawan, jai kisan'. However, one of his less discussed clarion calls can inspire even the present generation. He asked people to skip one meal every week as India was facing a grain shortage. My idealistic parents immediately made it their routine and told us children not to waste food, as many didn't have even a few morsels to survive. The practice became our family tradition. Thousands of families still follow the ritual, proving that leaders do have the power to change society. Let's move to 1988. At the Varanasi Railway locomotive factory hospital, a girl was born while PM Rajiv Gandhi was addressing the country from the Red Fort. Her father, a young editor, was serving in another city and received one of the most important pieces of news of his life — only hours later, as all phone lines were either busy or out of order throughout the day. Remembering those days at a time when information travels within seconds to any part of the world is like exploring a pre-historic cave in amazement. Mobile phones and the internet were non-existent then. A fortunate few had landlines. They needed to book a trunk call and wait for hours to get through to another city. Getting a phone connection meant years of waiting or seeking the 'blessings' of a Member of Parliament or the Union communications minister. Today, the same country boasts the second-highest number of mobile phone users in the world after China. Its 50-crore UPI user base is dazzling the world. From tech-savvy professionals in metro cities to the tribals in the jungles of Abhujhmad, the miraculous impact of this technology of transaction is transformative. Recap from 1978 to date. There was a time from the late 1970s through the 1980s when everyone felt the country would be torn asunder. The Kashmir insurgency was a decade away, but Punjab was on the boil. According to a research paper, the Pakistan-backed reign of terror claimed 11,694 lives between 1980 and 2000. A total of 1,784 personnel from Punjab Police and other central police forces either laid down their lives in the line of duty or were grievously injured. In 1982, Jarnail Singh Bhindranwale and his violent gang took control of the Harmandir Sahib (Golden Temple). Two years later, Operation Bluestar was initiated to flush them out of the premises. It led to the assassination of Indira Gandhi by her trusted Sikh bodyguards. Our heads hang in shame when we remember the atrocities meted out to the Sikh community in the aftermath of the Indira assassination. In those fateful months, we felt that the mindless hatred towards Sikhs would snatch this courageous community from our fold. But society closed ranks and showed again that Indians have an amazing ability to course correct voluntarily. In those days, many states in the Northeast were suffering from insurgency. It seemed the country would break apart. Editorial pages would mull over such possibilities on special occasions such as August 15 or January 26. Today, those concerns are part of a fading past. Except for the neighbour-sponsored violence in Kashmir, the scourge of terrorism has been wiped out from the rest of the states. The Maoist insurgency, a clear threat a decade ago, is on it last legs. Our national unity has been painstakingly forged over millennia though we became a political entity merely 78 years ago. On August 15, 1947, we gained Independence from the British and, today, we have surpassed their economy. We will become the third-largest economy in the world in a few years. That's the reason I laugh at people who talk of India breaking apart. Even Donald Trump's threats evoke memories of trials and transformation triggered by Johnson's red wheat. We'll face challenges in our journey ahead. All we need to do is take a vow to deal with at least one social vice on Independence Day. Shashi Shekhar is the editor-in-chief, Hindustan. The views expressed are personal.
Hindustan Times
8 hours ago
- Hindustan Times
What Sholay says about 1970s India
It was probably a coincidence that Sholay was released on Independence Day in 1975. But this does add a quixotic twist to the story we can call India after Sholay. Sholay produced a keyhole narrative about offence and vengeance in which there was no reference to any social-political context (Hindustan Times) The legend, as told in the film world, is that the film was already before the censor board when the Emergency was declared on June 25, 1975. In the version the censors first saw, Thakur, the chief protagonist of the film, kills the villain Gabbar Singh. This was unacceptable to the censor board — in keeping with the Indira Gandhi government's projection of the Emergency as a tool for restoring order and rule of law. The producers of Sholay changed the ending so they could get the censor board certificate. In the version we have been watching for 50 years, the climax of the film is that the police arrive just in time to, gently but firmly, persuade Thakur to not kill Gabbar. Bloodied and beaten, Gabbar is taken off to prison. Scholars of social history may well quarrel over whether the original version, with Thakur exacting vengeance, was more in sync with the mood of the times or whether it was a warning about where we were headed. In hindsight, those of us who grew up in the 1960s, can see Sholay as a landmark event in the decline of a social milieu in which reality was not a simplistic binary of good versus evil. Films about dacoits and other doers of bad deeds were commonplace. But it was Sholay that gave us a sociopathic villain whose cruel wit, brutal violence, and dramatic macho swagger resulted in iconic status. In later years, a popular brand of biscuits was actually advertised as Gabbar ki asli pasand (Gabbar's true preference), complete with a photo of the villain and his self-satisfied grin. However, Sholay did something much more insidious than make an evil character look cool. It produced a keyhole narrative about offence and vengeance in which there was no reference to any social-political context. Until then, filmi dacoits usually had a back-story that evoked the audience's compassion. In doing this, Hindi films were faithfully depicting a structural reality of the 1950s and 1960s — namely, of oppressed and traumatised peasants forced to take up arms and become dacoits out of desperation. Dilip Kumar's Ganga Jamuna, Sunil Dutt's Mujhe Jeene Do, and Raj Kapoor's Jis Desh Mein Ganga Behti Hai were made at a time when Vinoba Bhave and Jayaprakash Narayan were working on the ground for the surrender and rehabilitation of dacoits, who were mostly distressed farmers. Sholay provided no back-story for Gabbar — empathic or otherwise. Devoid of any socio-economic context, he is presented as pure evil — sadistic and maniacal. Thakur, as an honest and hard-working police officer-cum-landlord, captures Gabbar, but the prison system fails. Gabbar escapes, kills Thakur's family and cuts off Thakur's arms. Earlier, Hindi films critiqued the system of governance in order to project stories of rebellion or idealistic struggle. In the universe of Salim-Javed, the vastly successful duo who wrote the screenplay of Sholay, the governance system was invariably presented as defunct and worthless. This was offered as the justification for valorising vigilantism. In Sholay, there is no samaj (society) standing up together to fight evil. There is only Thakur's raw, personal need for revenge versus Gabbar as an individual. The urge to seek vengeance is indeed an atavistic human trait. This is precisely why much of India's pauranic tradition is devoted to helping us understand both the compelling reality of this urge and how we might process it in ways that don't leave everyone worse off. However, in the last five decades, a large volume of films has instead focused on revenge as personally satisfying and the only viable option. Society is depicted as having given up on the formal governance system delivering justice. In India after Sholay, the validation and celebration of vengeance, by individuals and collectives, became a cultural and political phenomenon. The lust for vengeance is no longer related to specific crimes against individuals. The political discourse, using digital era propaganda mechanisms, has generated collective forms of victimhood and projected vengeance as both natural and justified. This shift happened gradually, due to multiple reasons. It was not driven by cinema. But a wide variety of audio-visual media, including what currently purport to be news channels, do provide the drumbeat for what now appears to be a collective bloodlust. At times, this drumbeat can feel overwhelming. But it is still not the only reality. If we make the effort to listen carefully to the full variety of sounds and songs around us today, this will expand our mental space and perhaps even create some breathing space. In the relative calm of that space, we will be able to better cognise strivings based on compassion and reason. Then, justice rather than retribution can become not just attractive but possible. You could say that such defiant enthusiasm by itself cannot resolve the crisis of institutions and the justice system. True, but it is in fact energising countless efforts on the ground where highly talented people are working tirelessly to move the needle towards a humane rule of law. Such creative action is driven by a simple truth, however unpopular it might appear at present. Namely, mass acceptance of vengeance makes the restoration of the justice system increasingly difficult or even impossible. One way to counter this is to generate more public acknowledgement of the courage of otherwise unsung heroes and heroines on the ground. These are people who work doggedly for human rights and civil liberties — often at great risk as they grapple bravely with characters who could make Gabbar look tame by comparison. It might also help to watch the rejected original ending of Sholay, which can be found on YouTube. For, this version leaves us with some difficult questions. After Thakur succeeds in killing Gabbar, he crumbles to the ground, looking stunned. As Viru, the surviving hired gun, tries to comfort him, Thakur breaks down and sobs bitterly. The most obvious interpretation of this scene is that Thakur is finally able to let go and express grief and horror over the unspeakable cruelty inflicted upon him. But is Thakur also weeping because his victory somehow feels empty? Did eliminating Gabbar actually give Thakur the satisfaction he expected? What would have been the best application of the strength and resolve of a man of Thakur's calibre? When Sholay is re-released, again on Independence Day, we could just sit back and enjoy it as entertainment. But this need not prevent us from considering the above questions and pondering how, in real life, we might support true justice, which is a strength rooted in compassion. Rajni Bakshi is the founder of the YouTube channel Ahimsa Conversations. The views expressed are personal
