Dear Mr. Sagayam IAS...

Dr. T. CHINNARAJ JOSEPH JAIKUMAR                  

 (Former Principal& Secretary

The American College, Madurai)                               

47/23, Old Natham Road,

Madurai- 625 014.

To,

Mr. U. Sagayam, I.A.S.

Dear Mr.Sagayam,

             This open letter, I am prompted to write as a responsible citizen of India and as a senior academician-teacher who has been working with the youth of Madurai for about four decades. Though I have not personally known you, I have not failed to notice your activities as a public servant with keen interest. This is simply because you have proved to be one among the few civil servants in Tamilnadu, why, even in the whole of India who continue to carry the rare DNA molecules of the service in terms of intelligence, professionalism, personal courage and commitment to public duty. These DNA molecules somehow through some strange mutation, have vanished from the genetic store of your esteemed colleagues who have taken to political share-cropping, corruption, looting and begging for post-retirement positions crawling on the floor and touching the feet of the politicians. In such a vitiated milieux, civil servants like you always have to dare to weather the storm alone. You proved your mettle during your short term as the Collector of Madurai during the 2011 Assembly Elections and thereafter, probing the granite scam.

           Although you deserve applause for all that you have done, only luckily, I would say only luckily you got the opportunity to demonstrate your calibre as a civil servant. It is quite an irony in India that only an election commission or a law court can identify an honest bureaucrat to be given special assignments, and not the elected political executive. In such shuffling of dice of bureaucrats, many of your honest and able colleagues do not get such opportunities but simply fade away living in the fringes of the bureaucracy.

        Let me come to the present issue. All of a sudden, close to the forthcoming Assemly Elections some people of Tamilnadu, has simply created an icon out of your  ‘honestyimage’ using the social media. They also shout from the roof top that you must become the next Chief Minister of the Tamilnadu. My first question is, “Are you aware of this in the first place?”

         When I saw the pamphlets yesterday morning announcing the ‘Ilaingar Elluchi Maanaadu’ at Madurai, the first thing I did was to call the organisers and ask, “Is Sagayam attending?” The answer was “No.” My second question was “Is he at least aware of the fact that you are calling for the conference in his name? This time the answer was a vague “No.” My two other questions were, “Is he going to be your Chief Minister candidate? And has he given his consent to be fielded by you?” The answer from the other end was sadly disappointing. “Sir, only people like us must compel him to take up the responsibility. Please come for the meeting.”

        Though I was considerably peeved by the misgivings, I decided to attend the meeting with my wife on 3^rd Jan 2016. The first thing that drew my attention in the venue was the LCD sign board where I could see your face along with that of Dr. Abdul Kalam with some slogans iconizing you both for ‘honesty.’ My idle mind immediately asked me why Mahatma Gandhi’s face, the time tested ‘honesty icon’ was left out? I also asked myself, “Was it because Gandhi was not a Tamil, and not a career bureaucrat like you and Kalam? Or is it because, our youth do not read history anymore?

          The meeting started with thappattam followed by thamizh thai vazhthu and some kind of convictionless oath taking. (I have enclosed a copy of the oath for you to read). This was followed by a 30 minute rhetoric by a 10 year old child prodigee. A few organisers spoke with great angst overcome by apocalyptic gloom that Tamilnadu will be lost forever if Sagayam fail to take over as Chief minister of Tamilnadu.’ (They were however careful not to dilute their desire by using the phrase ‘Sagayam like people’).

             Two other interesting things drew my attention. First, though there was a lot of rhetoric about corruption, no mentioning of names of a single corrupt politician in power was made. Corruption was presented as something akin to a big monsoon failure leading to farmers’ suicide. The second important thing was that they profusely thanked the ‘police’ for their cooperation in putting up the conference.

         Apart from making a spectacle, the meeting in my opinion was devoid of an agenda that can promise to radically change the corrupt political system. The most disappointing thing for me was the complete absence of leaders among the youth who could lead from the front. One reporter of a leading English newspaper covering the event told me, 13 out of 20 organisers/volunteers he met, wanted to remain anonymous and plainly refused to give him their names.

         Then, I was met by a reporter of The Hindu (English) who asked me for my opinion. I said, “It looks like a shift from celluloid leadership to virtual space leadership. These people are projecting him [Sagayam] as the change [leader]. Mr.Sagayam should clear the air and not mislead these youngsters by remaining silent”. And this was carried by The Hindu on  04/01/2016.

          In this context, I urge you to seriously consider the following in the public interest:

1.   Perception matters in Public Life

Right perception matters in public life. Some see you as a ‘superman’ who can give Tamilnadu a corrupt free Government as its next Chief minister. Some see you vaguely as a ‘messianic hope’ for the entire future. Many youth see you as a ‘role model’. (But the same youth would not lead themselves but ironically ask you to lead them). People like me, see you as an upright civil servant who can diligently and honestly do what is expected of him to do. Worst, some see in you, a publicist. This is really bad for you. Therefore, I say that the time has come for you to make a public statement as to what you want to see of yourself as a public personality and what do you want to say to the expectant public who in my opinion misrepresent/misuse your image. Your continued silence would make you a suspect.

2.   The Sun Cannot Shine from within a Glass Case

As on date, you continue to remain as an Indian Administrative service Officer with obligations to discharge duties pertaining to public administration as mandated by the elected government in office. The Civil Service Code limits your role as a public servant and as such, you can do very little to salvage the corrupt system. Only when you step out of the role of a civil servant, you can enter real public life and risk an attempt to reform the corrupt system. I have no business to compel you to leave the civil service as some of your fans would like you to do. But you owe an honest answer to the ‘expectant’ followers of yours so that they get a clear direction. As an honest civil servant, you also owe an answer to the general public as to the true nature of your public identity. Allowing too much public glare and publicity certainly vitiates civil service ethos. Don’t we criticise our politicians for cheap publicity and populism?

 3. Civil Service Route to Politics

Civil Servants entering politics is nothing uncommon in India. One has the constitutional right to do so. Many yester year civil servants have done well in politics too. But the way a civil servant enters politics is important. You might have noticed civil servants directly winning elections using civil service vintage and move up in the party hierarchy. (Yashwant Sinha, Mani Shankar Iyer types). Some are invited by established political parties for their expertise. (Manmohan Singh types). Some develop additional six legs and move like spiders chafing the feet of powerful politician while in service, the quid pro quo route. (This fast emerging species is numerous that it is difficult to classify).

4.   From Admiration to Adoration to Adulation: Why Civil         Servants alone?

I am also prompted to draw your attention to the question why an honest and diligent civil servant alone is celebrated by the Indian/Tamil public, and not several other honest but humle people. [Thank God they do not celebrate efficient Army Generals as they do in Pakistan]. I will say that the creation of charisma in favour of civil servants in India, come from two premises. First, it is the colonial hangover that stokes the imagination that a civil servant is a ‘man extraordinary’ who can shower any amount of benevolence if he wills. (The corollary is, many don’t will). Madurai for instance, even now remembers Peter Raus (Collector of Madurai between 1815 and 1828) through ballads. He has been celebrated as ‘Peter Pandya.’ Interestingly, glorification by the then Madurai public made him commit benevolent excesses and overstep his shoes. Finally, he had to commit suicide facing enquiries.

Only the residues of colonial memory and imagination left in the collective consciousness of our people make them think that civil servants are super human. You will appreciate the point that in a democracy, an officer like you or any public servant for that matter is entitled only to a rightful admiration (meaning applause and acclaim). But what needs to be discouraged are adoration (reverence and devotion) and adulation (glorification and hero-worship). If at all our democracy has gone toxic today, it is because of adoration and adulation of leaders, leading to cult and hero-worship. Will you agree with me on this? During yester years, these adulations came through creation of celluloid images. Today, in your case, people are ironically creating it through virtual media and by singing hosanna to ‘a prophet who would not arrive at the Gates of Jerusalem yet.’

        The second premise of admiration and adulation of civil servants come from sheer abdication of personal responsibilities of individual actors as citizens. When someone does not want to take minimum personal responsibility as a citizen and pay the price for that, he or she expects somebody else do the house keeping for him or her. They are the lot unwillingly but selfishly subscribe to benevolent dictatorship or authoritarianism. Only inwardly weak individuals crave for ‘externally strong leaders to lead.’ And they want them to come from somewhere. They always like to be camp followers without taking responsibilities.  In no time leaders become gods.

       In my grandfather’s days at the face of political distress, people used to say, “The white man should not have left this country…our people do not know how to rule. In my father’s generation I used to hear sighs, “We need a military rule and not democracy…. Gandhi must be blamed for all these democratic mess… he got freedom free… without sweat and blood.” In my days, I have heard people saying, “We need an Indra Gandhi to discipline this undisciplined, through another National Emergency.” Like me, you also must have heard all these groans of desperation. Now, I hear the slogan, “We need Sagayam to salvage Tamilnadu.” Perhaps you also hear this. (If not, please see the pamphlet I have attached with this letter).

       My point is that no one is willing to acquire capabilities to be a citizen of this country; no one wants to pay the price of being a leader, both the young and the old; no one wants to understand that each individual in a democracy has a personal price to pay to enjoy freedom and dignity. They want a messiah to arrive and shoulder the burden of transforming Tamilnadu. In other words, the message is that they want a cult figure whom they can worship; a dictator whom they can obey; and if needed a messiah who can be sent to the sacrificial altar.  We have had enough of this in the name of democracy.

5.   Messiahs go to Live with the  People

       If by any chance Mr.Sagayam, you choose to leave civil service and enter public life, do not get encouraged to encash electoral politics. But start a grassroots movement. People like us would hold hands with you. Even the greatest of messiahs like Christ and Prophet Mohamed when they arrived, went down to the people of the lowest rung and gave their sweat and blood. If you also commit to do that, you will build basic capacities in people as citizens; help the youth to lead from the front and not hide behind icons, real and imagined. Then you will be at the head of a movement, and not a Chief Minister of a ‘servile Tamil Country’ of cult worshipers.

Are you willing to do this Mr.Sagayam ?

         I would certainly appreciate a reply from you.

                                                                      In Democracy we commit.

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                         Your Fellow Citizen

05.01.2016

Madurai                                                                      Dr. T. Chinnaraj Joseph Jaikumar

 Tippu Sultan: Biopic and Politics

 

No art escapes politics. But a true art is an art first, and politics next. If political choices, that too, blatant political choices of the establishment decide what art should do, then it becomes propaganda. Such politics devour art. Contrarily, true art creatively engages history, politics and society and redefine them in terms of universal consciousness and for refinement of humanity.

For me, the provocation to reiterate this well known truth came when a few BJP satraps appealed to Super Star Rajnikanth not to act in the proposed biopic on Tippu Sultan on the ground that Tippu was ‘anti-Tamil,’ ‘anti-Indian’ and a ‘religious bigot’ who caused cruelty on Tamil population when he invaded the western part of Tamilnadu in the eighteenth century. Even Makkal Thilakam M.G. Ramachandran’s autobiographical note has been surprisingly dug out and quoted to historically place Tippu’s invasion of Palakad in 1789. Thanks to the historical sensibilities of BJP and the allowance made to, and the concern shown for Tamil identity.

My concern is not politics per se but politics that prevent cinema evolving into a better art form than what it is today. Wherein, the increasing political intimidation is a recent phenomenon, the Indian cinema was already ailing from several other afflictions: it’s extremely populist appeal through formulaic productions, the star system, covert and overt political ambitions of leading stars and their political alliances, the control of the industry through such alliances, cultic fan following devoid of film appreciation, absence of genre consciousness etc. These factors have denied Indian cinema, its ability to critically and creatively engage culture and society. Less said better about its engagement with history.

Compared to other film genres, the genre of ‘Historic films’ and its fraternal twin, the genre of ‘biopic’ (biographic films), always have to storm rough weather as these films have to handle harsh facts in order to maintain accuracy and integrity. Even if a historic or biopic film genre grants some artistic freedom and a few aesthetic devices to the director or producer, it is still a tight rope walk to adapt a piece of history or biography for a film. With artistic license, a historic film or a biopic is certainly prone to ‘polish’ or ‘romanticize’ or even ‘exaggerate’ some historical fact or facts. However, when the Lakshmanreka of artistic freedom is crossed in a historic/biopic film, then the film ends up either as a mythological extravaganza or a cheap propaganda glorifying someone or some event in history. This is what Indian cinema has done largely. In other words in India, a biopic is a rare exception than a rule. Going by Indian film making tradition, BJP’s worries are ironically justified. They cannot afford to allow Thippu’s ghost ossify into another deity and become part of the pantheon of the myth loving Indians.

Added to this is the complication that arises out of the fluid nature of history itself. The second set of controversies that surround historic/biopic film genre is related to two other questions. Why that portion of history or historical figure for the film? And what version of history the film maker would rely on?

This problem arises from the ‘fluid’ nature of history itself. It is an obvious fact that even well researched history inevitably leaves a gap between ‘what was truly the past’ and what is represented as ‘truth of the past.’ Any history is always selective, and the truth it represents is only partial. Validity of any piece of history is therefore relative only to the questions the historian raised as he started his/her probe, the information or data he/she could access about the past event or events under question and finally the perspective or point of view with which a historian interprets the said information to draw meaning. Simply stated, no History is Gospel Truth. There can be multiple histories. And every truth claim of history today would be modified tomorrow as new facts come in and as perspectives change. This is the reason why, what was considered subversive or anti-national in the past becomes nationalistic or patriotic later, and one who was hanged as a traitor earlier is beatified later as a martyr. For a film maker, this ever present ambiguity in history is a real intellectual and political challenge. In making several of the decisions on the complex historical subject handled, the film maker is to be solely guided by what he/she thinks as to what aesthetically and politically makes sense for him/her at the time of film making. The film maker has this right, and as a true artist, he/she has to exercise this right to the best of his/her ability.

For BJP however, history is an immutable ‘Holy Gospel’ which they alone as ordained priests are entitled to hold in their hands and interpret. At their sweet will, they go about making ‘history out of myths’ and ‘myth’ out of history. As myth makers, they see Ashok Kenny, the Kannada film maker who is inclined to make Tippu biopic as another myth maker and villainous competitor. No wonder, they intimidate him.

Yet another point that needs attention is the film viewing culture. Reality hurts our film goers.

Cinema is continued to be seen as an entertainment that provides a world of escape with its fantasy, mythology, gloss and grandiose. Biopic and historical films go against the grain. This is the reason why the mainstream producers who start with historic films or biopic end up making compromises and mythifying historical subjects adding to existing prejudices and stereotypes.

It is true that there were forced conversions of a few thousand defeated Nair soldiers and Kodavas by Tippu. These were acts more of political exigency governed by 18^th centaury standards in war, than a policy that characterized his rule. This need not make anyone round him off as a religious bigot.  

He was by all standards an emerging ‘early modern’ ruler of India who  put up a modern state, raised a modern army in the European fashion, practiced international diplomacy and reorganized the revenue system to pave the way for early capitalism in then Mysore, patronized public aesthetics by putting up public gardens like Lalbagh etc. His Mysore Kingdom included half of present day Kerala and Tamilnadu at the height of his power.

His heroic charm came from his military genius and personal courage. He was possibly the last Indian King to have entered into a treaty on equal footing with the British. (II Anglo Mysore War followed by Treaty of Mangalore 1784). He was the first in the world to have used rockets in modern warfare. He stunned the British with his rockets in the Battle of Poliur. Dr APJ Abdul Kalam, the former President of India, in his Tippu Sultan Shaheed Memorial Lecture in Bangalore on 30^th November 1991, called Tippu Sultan the innovator of the world's first war rocket.

 Tippu was adept in international diplomacy too.  Only on his instigation Napolean Bonaprte invaded Egypt thinking that he can invade India crossing over Suez.

Till the final hour Tippu led from the front and died fighting gripping his sword. He died at the age of 49.

Tippu’s life thus provides a multiple narrative. His rise and fall over a period of about 30 years certainly provides a narrative arc that is fascinatingly engaging even in prose. What is expected of the producer is not a reverential approach to construct a hero out of Tippu. With the artistic tools in his command and from a critical distance, the Producer/Director has to necessarily fathom the depth of a personality who proved historically consequential. Such a biopic would teach what history can’t teach about human nature. The question whether Tippu is a hero or villain becomes secondary.

                                         @@@

   

 T. Chinnaraj Joseph

                                                                           

    

In Search of a New Tamil Identity

                                          Photos: Courtesy, On Manorama, Thiruvanthapuram

If the conviction of Jaya is taken as a victory for rule of law, then the reactions that followed seem to viciously demand a different definition of democracy. Though it looks apparently comical, it does not fail to sadly indicate the level of decadence the polity and culture in Tamilnadu have undergone. There is not a single political party who could raise its voice in a credible manner.

 DMK is too worried about the writings on the wall; PMK with its higher decibel is not effectively heard beyond its constituency; DMDK is too muffled or muddled about what it says; MDMK is high pitched but hollow; Congrees has gone on vacation; other parties if any do not matter. Jaya episode has proved one thing- no party in Tamilnadu is strong enough to provide any direction during the hour of the crisis. Apart from this, there is no independent voice coming from the so called civil society or independent public intellectuals of stature.

 In the virtual absence of opposition, AIADMK is happily continuing with its jingoism saying “Innocent Amma is victimized by the Karnataka judge and she must be released soon.” What started as a psychopathic denial of reality (people carrying and displaying boxes of laddus in front of the Parapana Agrahara court anticipating victory for venerable Amma) was then followed by shock, melodrama, mass hysteria and suicides. The mass hysteria and unreason is again and again whipped up to go in fresh spirals. The hope is that a new truth can be established in the public conscience and pressure brought on the courts to view the case leniently. It also aims to intimidate and silence everyone. The official machinery particularly the police, is brought into serve the interest of the party. If left uncontested, Tamilnadu is bound to institutionalize a new meaning for democracy.

Corruption is everywhere.  Perhaps Om Prakash Chauthala and Lallu Prasad Yadav might have already played John the Baptist to Amma. Yet, they all belong to the Aryan North. What inspired them could not have inspired our Dravidian leaders with Tamil pattru and maanam (Tamil patriotism and honor). Neither are our adulation of leaders and ready servitude quite comparable to Haryanites and Biharis.

The Dravidian politics after all went into liberating the Tamil Makkal (Tamil People) from Aryan linguistic and cultural hegemony and secure them urimai (freedom) thanmaanam (self respect) and munnettam (progress). In realizing this mission, they agreed to democratically work through the Indian constitutional process after initial secessionist posturing through the call for thani Dravidanadu (separate Dravidanadu) till mid1960s.

If we claim today (which we involuntarily do in all awaken moments) that thanmaana thamizhan (self respecting Tamil) has already arrived recovering his long suppressed cultural identity intact and with all its adornment and intellectual vigor, one question still begs. Has the newly acquired politico-cultural identity as tamizhan or tamizhachi equipped one to live in a modern democracy as a poruppulla kudimahan/mahazh (responsible citizen)?

 If the answer is no, then it is not enough we criticize what is happening before us and stop. We have come to a point where we are asked to review and re-define our Tamil identity to incorporate a democratic world view- not to fight the Arya Mayaii (Aryan Illussion) alone but the Dravida Mayaii (Dravidan Illussion) too. Have we not gone round the full circle?

Chinnaraj Joseph/04.10.2014

JUDICIAL CONSCIENCE VERSUS PUBLIC CONSCIENCE

It is something unprecedented in the history of ‘democratic India’ that a sitting Chief Minister  has been jailed for a substantial period of four years on charges of corruption and fined an astronomical sum of one billion rupees. The case has other dimensions too. It dragged on for about 18 years before it painfully delivered itself. “Justice delayed is not justice denied” say the old fashioned believers in ‘rule of law’ with a sigh of relief.

Those who have lost faith in ethical conscience (an essential ingredient for good democracy)  say that this is of no consequence and it is a matter of time before J emerges victorious.  “Might is right” they believe. But the party men, fervent devotees and camp followers are angry that a great injustice has been inflicted on J by the judiciary playing ball with ‘venomous Karuna and treacherous Swami’.

Disappointingly many political pandits who are brought into analyze ‘the hour of crisis’ look too intimidated and overawed. In order to avoid controversy, taking different roots, they tacitly arrive at the same point of the cynics and say “J would ultimately prevail.”  More sympathetic among them even go to the extent of saying that with a proxy CM in OPS, she will continue to do the good work which she has been credited with for the time being. Perhaps they did not say ‘good governance’.

The main opposition namely DMK who is one of the complainants in the case looks feeble and meditative as it has to avoid ‘the pot calling the kettle black’ irony. For some DMK scamsters and members of the first family awaiting trial, it turned out to be a trigger that started the churning of their viscera.

But one person who would have really enjoyed watching the TV is none other than J herself. But she refused to have one installed in her cell.

Now let me turn towards the judicial conscience that came into play in the action of Judge John Michael D. Cunha. His conduct notwithstanding the merits of the judgment, calls for attention especially in the context of eroding faith in the judiciary.

Prior to the delivery of the judgment, two strong streams of thought-manifestly bragged about as well latently subscribed to- that dominated the public conscience. First, it was the expression of the feeling “all is not well with the judiciary these days.” And you were told that it was too very idealistic and unrealistic to believe that courts are unfailing arbiters of justice. Secondly, you were also unabashedly told by many quarters that before the ‘invisible power of so and so’ judiciary would after all buckle in and give a favorable judgment.

 But at the end, everything seemed to be alright with Cunha as a judge and judiciary as the last resort of hope in a corrupt democracy. Apparently the judge seems to have acted with certain independence, courage and devotion to duty. Of course his judgment needs to stand the scrutiny of the higher courts and about which I do not need to comment here. Suffice it is to say that justice is seen to have been done.

But my bewilderment comes from the way the case has now been dragged before the ‘people’s court’ which of course works not according to ‘rule of law’ but the ‘rule of demagoguery’ where emotion is replaced by reason, deliberation by imprudence, dialogue by stonewalling, consensus by altercation, persuasion by intimidation and conscience by depravity.

 Watching any TV channel we get at least one judgment passed every ten minutes. What a political vibrancy we witness in Tamilnadu!

I can’t help but only offer my consolation to ‘rule of law’ votaries of democracy. Given the political trend, they may have to wait for another 36 years before they have another sigh of relief witnessing ‘public conscience’ coming of age. No democracy can survive long without a robust ‘public conscience’ which readily tells you what is right and wrong in public life.

Being an optimist myself, I counsel only patience and perseverance. There is no democracy in history which failed to throw ugly mutations as they evolved.



30.09.2014              Chinnaraj Joseph