“Be it caste or communal violence, they stall the growth of the nation. Let us affirm that we will be free from these tensions.”

This is a test. It's a great quote, actually. Threatening violence just because of caste or communal differences does take us backwards as a society. We are better than this, right? I like to think we are. Now, just take a moment here and guess whose quote it is. Difficult? Okay, let me make it easier. The quote is by a seasoned politician, with a bright future. Try and guess again and keep it to yourself. It's a test, remember. Read on.

The controversy around 'Padmavati' has well and truly erupted in the past couple of days. It's been so crazy that I've personally not managed to keep account of all the bounties on the heads of Ranveer, Deepika and Bhansali himself. Is it Rs. 5 crores for deepika's hands or 10 crores for Ranveer's head? And who are these incredibly rich people who are outbidding and sponsoring murders direct on national television?

© BCCL

What we're witnessing in 'Padmavati' protests is the silent extreme majority, that's not silent anymore. And this is not just a one-off. There have been warning signs we've ignored for a few years now. It's a continuation of the dilution of the Indian culture to suit the extremist views of the right wing. We've seen it in other forms earlier - you eat meat, you die; you speak out against the establishment, you're anti-national; you marry outside your religion, it's love jihad. For a country that prides itself for being incredibly tolerant, the evidence points otherwise.

While artists, journalists and anyone with liberal set of values are labelled inconsequential in regards to this new idea of India, the likes of Hindu Mahasabha and Karni Sena are allowed to run amok. Recently, in one of the most bashful displays of power, the Hindu Mahasabha established a 32-inch tall bust of Nathuram Godse, the assassinator of Mahatma Gandhi at its office in Daulatganj, Gwalior City. For them, Godse was a nationalist and the 'temple' at their office is a matter of pride.

"Nobody should have any objection to this as we have set up the temple in our own space. It is Mahasabha's own property," said Mahasabha's Vice-president Jaiveer Bharadwaj, justifying his organisation's actions.

To understand the current political environment of the country, it's important to know what feeds this kind of hate and activism. India is going through an economic downturn. After a massive blow to the Indian economy because of outlandish and brutal policies that were executed badly, the government lead by Narendra Modi is facing unprecedented backlash from its core group of supporters. Be it jobs or the promise of bringing structural reforms to labour laws, the gulf of difference between what was promised and what's been delivered is slowly changing the mood at the ground level. It's not scary enough for an upset in the upcoming state elections but it will definitely be an issue if the tide doesn't turn soon.

© BCCL

Therefore, the current wave of nationalism and cultural protectionism is a quick-fix way to divert attention from issues that truly matter. It's a master-stroke by the government in power but there's a thin line between insanity and genius. Historically, whenever the government of the day muddles in issues that flame communal hatred or pit particular communities against each other, it doesn't end well. Be it Indira Gandhi in Kashmir in 1983 or the Sangh Parivar's agenda of Hindutva now, political parties looking to further their vision of a 'new-age' India with societal controls often blows up with horrendous circumstances.

In contrast then, the hullabaloo surrounding Sanjay Leela Bhansali's magnum-opus 'Padmavati' is intriguing to say the least. The Rajput community contests that some scenes in the movie depict Rani Padmini as the love interest of Khalji, the bashful Muslim ruler who is supposed to have courted Rani Padmini during his conquests in north India. But according to Bhansali himself, that's not the case because the controversial 'dream sequence' was never filmed. This statement from Bhansali must have cleared all such doubts but somehow it snowballed into a bigger controversy thereafter.

“This movie embroiled into so many controversies because of some rumour. Rumour is this, in the movie a dream scene has been filmed between Rani Padmavati and Alauddin Khilji. I have already rejected this claim and also given a written proof of this. Today again, I am reiterating through this video that in our movie there is no such scene between Rani Padmavati and Alauddin Khilji, which would hurt the sentiments of anyone,” Bhansali had said in his attempt to clear the rumours.

That there's no dream sequence in the movie is abundantly clear from Bhansali's statement as well as the special screening that was held for a handful of media persons. But still, the release of the movie seems to have been deferred. What is it then that makes the story of 'Padmavati' controversial?

© BCCL

In order to understand the historical account of this story, it's important to note that Khilji defeated the Rana of Chittor in 1303 and subsequently died in 1316. The story of 'Padmavati' though first appears in 1540, in a book of poetry by Malik Muhammad Jayasi, a sufi poet. That there's no mention of Padmavati for 224 years when she's supposed to have committed jauhar to save her honour against a Muslim ruler shows that the Khilji-Padmavati romance theorists did actually got it wrong. Why haven't then the filmmakers made sure that the true story comes out? Were the protests being seen as a good marketing vehicle for a movie with considerable investment?

In hindsight, 'Padmavati' the movie doesn't deserve to be released. In fact, it should be banned. The government, by default, should take steps to stop its screening, now or in future, just because we know how inept it was in stopping all the protests and madness around it. If you are not against it, then you are for it, surely. The makers of the movie have given in to threats and political statements that amount to extortion, even though they can objectively convey that there's not even a single frame with both the characters of Padmavati and Khilji onscreen. They have chosen to take a step back and allow a theatre of threats and lunacy to play and sort itself. It puts up a lot of question marks over their beliefs and priorities because if they can't even stand up for their own work, then why should the audience risk a viewing amidst a threatening and violent environment?

And so, we come back to what it means for India. What it means for a country where installing a statue of a murderer is tolerable but releasing a movie with stories of characters that might actually be fictional, is a headache? Can we continue to call ourselves modern when every difference of opinion is labelled anti-national?

It's all inconsequential. Why? Read that quote once again.

“Be it caste or communal violence, they stall the growth of the nation. Let us affirm that we will be free from these tensions.”

-Narendra Modi

See the irony now?

Modi is essentially a politician PM. And the problem with politicians is that they want us to affirm that we will be free from these tensions (communal, caste violence) but only when it suits their agenda. Other than that, be it Padmavati or Bajirao, Godse or Bhindrawale, they're going to leave you at the mercy of the mob because fear is the best form of social control and that is all they crave, especially when they are in power.