Censorship controversy

THE resignation of the chair person and some other members of the Central Board of Film Certification in India raises a controversy. In India, irrespective of whichever government is in office, adults are not allowed to have even the freedom of viewing scenes which may have political, moral, sexual and other kinds of physical content which officials may think corrupt their minds. The attitude betrays authoritarian and narrow- minded guarding of received notions and values. Kissing and intimacy are now being shown in Indian films, though in small doses. However , warnings against smoking and drinking are displayed whenever such acts are shown on screen, along with the pointless statement that the actors do not indulge in either vice. What a pity if that goes with a film like Devdas or I will cry tomorrow! Woody Allen did not have one of his recent films shown In India for that reason. Indian DVDs of international film classics are also sometimes subjected to cuts, for instance, of Fellinis La Dolce Vita. There was a joke that during the prime ministership of Morarji Desai, even Hamlet was banned because Claudius was shown drinking out of a goblet. Freedom of expression in cinema is sometimes bridled to protect obscurantism as was done in the case of Water for some time and when UP chief minister Mayavati wanted to clamp down on Samrakhshan on a mistaken notion about the content. Indian censorship should at least approximate to what is done in the advanced countries. Censorship should be done by an independent body. There should be no political or sectarian interference. But, of course, liberty should not degenerate into licence. Self-censorship should be ideal but based on intelligent understanding of creative imagination. It is hard to understand why some scenes of Titanic which won 11 academy awards were take out in India while a film like Dirty Picture could be shown without cuts.

View original post here:
Censorship controversy