Why Karan Johar's freedom of expression is the biggest joke
Karan Johar thinks freedom of expression in India is a joke. Appearing at the Jaipur Literature Festival, the director first sounded notes of caution about not willing to take on “governance” (if he was trying to be cute with this, it didn’t work, since governance is not something you can take on, Karan!), but soon threw caution to the winds, and spoke, what may well seem courageously, about the shrinking space for debate in this country.
Only, his argument was bull. Johar, the maker of candyfloss cinema that does nothing to take the conversation forward, should be the last person to complain about freedom of expression. Yes, he did face trouble for the AIB roast, but even in that particular case, he has been granted reprieve by the Mumbai High Court. Besides, the lazy homophobia of his jokes, as he joined Arjun Kapoor and Ranveer Singh in some hardly subtle winking and nudging at his sexuality, perhaps calls for a ban on such freedom of expression.
The question on freedom of expression in the arts has become an easy bogeyman with which to create outrage, when in fact most people who raise this bogey do nothing to further the cause of genuine debate. Aamir Khan spoke of intolerance some time back, purportedly to draw attention to the brutal lynching of a man in Dadri who was killed on suspicion he consumed beef. But Aamir’s statement refused to account for the real danger that aam Muslims may face because of his statements. The quick correlation he drew between the plight of a Muslim in Dadri and himself was not just disingenuous but tone-deaf.
Furthermore, when the same aam Muslim rose to destroy property and peace in Malda, Aamir was silent.
The freedom of expression that Karan, Aamir and others are asking for is really the freedom to espouse a certain privileged stance that is far from reality and does not brook any deviation. Surprisingly, the stance itself can be laughably conservative. Johar has often hinted at his gayness but not once has he taken on the powers that be on an issue where his voice and stature can lead to real change.
His movies are a succession of egregious stereotypes that encase gays in visions that any real gay person would be hard pressed to relate to. Yet, his films have done very well, as a paying, largely straight audience has found ready humour in his work. So, for him to speak of intolerance is a bit rich since the real intolerance is his refusal to showcase a real, slice-of-life, stripped down version of homosexuality on the screen.
The one film where Johar seemed to look beyond his tunnel vision was Kabhi Alvida Na Kehna, in which a so-called homely woman decides to have an extramarital affair, while the go-getter, ambitious woman wants to save her marriage. That was a nice flipping of traditional Bollywood tropes even if it was too stagey. That film, however, did not do half as well as, say, Kabhi Khushi Kabhi Gham, which was dressed to the nines in the most reactionary ethos.
So the freedom of expression that Johar et al are asking for is really the freedom to propagate a risible status quo. There is little soul-searching, little of the questioning that art must aim for. Any forward note is suppressed under heaps of the good and the straight and the narrow so that only those in on the joke get it. Worse, freedom of expression has actually worked against egalitarian ideals in some cases. For every Queen and Piku, there is a Mastizaade or Kya Kool Hain Hum, sex comedies that are made under the rubric of freedom of expression but which really cater to the lowest common denominator.
What then is the solution? Maybe our society itself is too wicked, too lurid to get better entertainment. Perhaps so, but surely this is not a problem that can be couched in the uplifting tones of freedom of expression. Freedom of expression is a cherished goal, but one that can easily be mangled to perpetuate dogma. When our stars ride on the bandwagon, let us be careful lest we omit to read between the lines.