First, an apology for a rather delayed post,
and, on a subject that has now become somewhat stale.
This is about the All India Bakchod `Roast’.
I think it would be helpful if you know what a `Roast’ is as well as get some
background on the controversy.
Wikipedia says that a `Roast’ is an event in
which a specific individual, a guest of honour, is subjected to good-natured
jokes at their expense intended to amuse the event's wider audience. This type
of event was created as a mock counter to a `Toast’. Such events are
intended to honour a specific individual in a unique way. In addition to jokes
and insult comedy, such events may also involve genuine praise and tributes.
The implication is that the roastee is able to take the jokes in good humour
and not as serious criticism or insult, and it is seen by some as a great honour to be roasted. The
individual is surrounded by friends, fans, and well-wishers, who can receive
some of the same treatment as well during the course of the evening.
The party and presentation itself are both
referred to as a "roast." The host of the event is called the "roast
master." Anyone who is honoured in such a way is said to have been
"roasted."
All India Bakchod or AIB is a Mumbai based
comedy group. They have released several skits on You Tube, most of which are
hilarious by most standards. The skits are genuinely funny, well put together
and have just enough bad language so as to remain in context. I have seen
almost all these skits. One member of AIB, Ashish Shakya is a columnist for
Hindustan Times. I make it a point to read his columns. They are often very
funny. Sometimes they are badly written, but that is not the point.
The point I am making is that I am familiar
with AIB’s work, I find it funny, I like it and it does not contain heaps of
filthy language. In other word, they have built up a formidable reputation by
remaining `clean’. And, yes, I have watched the show i.e. the `Roast’.
The `Roast’ was held on 20th
December 2014 at the Vallabhbhai Patel Stadium at the NSCI in Mumbai for which,
AIB, have been at pains to point out, tickets cost Rs. 4,000/-. Karan Johar was
the Roast Master and Ranveer Singh and Arjun Kapoor were the `Roastee’s’. Of
course pot shots were taken at many others, Deepika Padukone, Karan Johar, Alia
Bhat and others. The proceedings of the `Roast’ were recorded and later on 28th
January 2015 i.e. 5 weeks after the show, uploaded on You Tube for all to see. This
5 week gap should be borne in mind by you, dear reader. The You Tube link
contained language to the effect that if you were under 18 years of age and/or
easily offended you should not watch the clip.
The clip went viral and soon the long arm of
the law intervened. FIR’s have been lodged against the participants. Presumably
investigations are on. The complaints range from obscenity, using filthy
language, the `Roast’ being offensive to dignity of women, Christians and
Sindhis, digs at sexual orientation and so on and so forth.
AIB have pulled the clip off You Tube. AIB
have apologised to the Archdiocese of Mumbai for hurting the sentiments of the
Christian community. The apology has been accepted.
This episode has resulted in an uproar. You
have protests from those who support free speech [without being aware that
there is no free speech in Indian Law], you have women groups protesting,
Christian groups, Hindus, intellectuals who alas are also unaware that there is
no free speech in Indian Law, television anchors stoking flames. In other words,
just a normal storm in our tea cup. Frankly, this entire storm in a teacup is
only among the English speaking. This will never cause a storm in a `Khullad’.
Now, I am a washed up lawyer with an
incomplete and imprecise knowledge of law in general and criminal law in
particular. This places me in the unique and privileged position of expressing
my opinion on this subject.
With help from Legally India, here are
transcripts of portions of the show. Please do read this with attention.
"I am not saying that Ranveer Singh does Sh** films but truly, the
last good thing he was in, was Deepika Padukone."
"Ranveer spent 4 years in the industry. One of acting and three years
of getting over Anushka Sharma."
"Arjun has lost the kilos faster than Deepika lost her dating
standards."
"In 2 States, Arjun plays a Punjabi guy who falls for a hot South
Indian. So basically he played Boney Kapoor. "
"Parineeti Chopra is not here tonight as we told her she will get
f***ed by 10 dudes in front of 4000 thousand people. Karan Johar is here for
the same reason."
"Deepika and Ranveer, what an awesome couple. Deepika is a state
level Badminton player. Ranveer is a national level sex offender. "
"Kuch Kuch Hota Hain is Ranveer's favorite. Even today he will reach
out to a box of tissues. Because he is the only guy who will j**k out to Farida
Jalal."
"Arjun and Ranveer send out the message that if you work hard, then
one day, you too can S**k Adi Chopra's C*ck."
"No matter how remote, dangerous or smelly, if there is a hole,
Ranveer Singh will enter it. "
"We wanted Ranbir, but we only managed Ranveer..which is what
Deepika did, so it should be okay"
“F***ing, Abuses by Mother name, Bhosdi Ke, Ch**t (Hindi Word for
vagina), L**d (Hindi Word for penis), Male & Woman Genitals, were used very
often.
“[X] is so unattractive that he was an altar boy for 10 years and even a
priest wouldn't touch him”
Explanation: The trope of
paedophilia within the Church is very common in comedy and often used as a
stock joke, though it is originally based on widespread child abuse scandals
within the Catholic and Roman Catholic churches by priests, for which
churches in many countries have issued apologies.
“X is such a virgin, that in five days he's going to give birth to
Jesus. Unfortunately [he's] also so ugly, that Jesus doesn't love him but he
just wants to be friends.”
Explanation: This was used as a
put-down of one of the AIB comedian’s sexual prowess, referencing Christians'
belief that in the Bible, Mary was a virgin when she gave birth to Jesus, the
Son of God. The second part is referencing Christians’ common belief that Jesus
loves everyone, couple with the insinuation that the target does not have a
girlfriend.
“[X] is so catholic, once he's done masturbating, it takes three days
for his [penis] to resurrect.”
Explanation: Referencing
catholic guilt of masturbation, innuendo about a lack of sexual prowess,
obliquely linked to a reference about the resurrection of Jesus.
One of the statements made by Mr. Vinod Tawde
the Maharashtra Culture Minister was that he had directed an enquiry to be made
on the question as to whether the `Roast’ had the necessary permissions in
place. This is of some relevance.
My enquiries with those in greater know than
me reveal that all performances require permission. As far as scripted
performances are concerned, a copy of the script has to be submitted when applying.
Thus, scripts of plays are submitted. Furthermore, at times the performance may
be directed to be open for viewing by adults only.
Now as far as extempore performances are
concerned [which the `Roast’ was claims is one, which claim was later denied by
AIB] you cannot possibly have a script. So, in these cases a synopsis of the
performance is submitted to the authorities, who, presumably grant permission
on condition that there will be no deviation from the synopsis.
A complaint against AIB was that the script submitted
deviated from the actual performance. Now this, to me, is mystifying. If the
show was extempore it could not have a script. AIB said that the show was not
extempore i.e. not live, in a reply to the authorities. But, at the same time the
show was touted as being live. Why was there a 5 week delay in upload? Was
there a lot of manipulation in `creating’ a live show? Is there more than what
meets the eye? Is AIB caught up in its own web of lies? Is there any
permission? I have no answer.
None of these laws or requirements is new and
unknown. So why is there so much confusion?
Now our English `Middia’ had a few
shouting matches on this controversy. Alas, they could not continue as the AAP –
BJP – Arvind Kejriwal – Kiran Bedi show hogged prime time television. The
points being explored, ad nauseum by our English `Middia’ – breathless schoolgirl
Barkha Dutt and the equally breathless and extremely sanctimonious Nidhi Razdan
– were, who is to decide what is obscene and vulgur? People were at pains to
answer. I am amazed at the sheer stupidity and ignorance of the compares’’ as well
as the talk show participants. Surely the answer is the Courts. I mean what are
Courts there for? Do they not determine questions of law, do they not determine
if a crime has been committed? So why do we have these asinine questions? I
have no answer.
Some of the other clichéd questions asked.
Is there absolute freedom of speech in India?
Do you have the right to offend and equally be
offended?
Why are we such a sensitive nation/people?
If you are so easily offended why not turn
the TV off, or log out of You Tube or not read the book?
No matter how offensive, a couple of
jokes/painting/cartoons/[insert your offence of choice here] can do nothing to
diminish our faith in Christianity/Islam/Sikhism/[insert your faith of choice
here].
Is not Christianity/Islam/Sikhism/[insert
your faith of choice here] greater than the jokes made?
Well dear readers, the cruel fact is that we
do not, in law, have absolute freedom of speech. To very briefly point this
out, you should keep in mind the differences between India and France. France,
of course being where the Charlie Hebdo massacre took place.
In India freedom of speech is subject to the
following limitations.
1.
security
of the State,
2.
friendly
relations with foreign States,
3.
public
order,
4.
decency
and morality,
5.
contempt
of court,
6.
defamation,
7.
incitement
to an offence, and
8.
sovereignty
and integrity of India.
In France the position is slightly different.
Here the restrictions:
1.
prohibit
incitement to hatred, discrimination, slander and racial insults.
2.
prohibit
any racist, anti Semite, or xenophobic activities, including Holocaust denial.
3.
prohibit
hatred against people because of their gender, sexual orientation, or
disability.
Most significantly, France does not implement
any preliminary government censorship for written publications. Any violation
of law must be processed through the courts.
Therefore, some parts of the `Roast’ even in
France would have fallen within (3) above. There is simply no point is
jabbering on about freedom of expression in India. It does not exist in
absolution. Of course we may aspire to a Utopian state where absolute freedom
of expression does or, could exist, but, alas, at the moment it does not.
If absolute freedom of speech does not exist,
why should turning a blind eye, i.e. turning the TV off, or logging out of You
Tube or not reading the book stop the act from being an offence? A wrong is a
wrong whether you see it or switch off. Can our `Middia’ and
intellectuals and liberals not realise this?
To conclude, as he has been most
appropriately described, Our Nation’s Conscience – Aamir Khan has suddenly
jumped into this. An ulterior motive? He says:
“I don’t like to show you violence. I am sure there are lot of young
people who have liked the show. My opinion is that it was a violent show. Karan
(Johar) and Arjun (Kapoor) are my friends and I scolded them and told them that
I was not impressed with it. I am not someone who can laugh at abuses and bad
language, I think I have passed that age. I am not a 14 year-old who will laugh
at abuses. I am not impressed. I personally have a problem with what they have
done, therefore I have not seen the show. I felt that this is not my type of
show, that’s why I haven’t seen it,”
Did you get the last sentence? Truly another
great intellectual.
By the way, did you think that the transcript
was offensive? I did.
