http://www.asianage.com/columnists/cut-retake-401

6:19 AM, Thursday Dec 24, 2015

Cut, retake

Adoor Gopalakrishnan

"The FTII chairman should be a person of calibre, of national
standing. He cannot be just anybody. Gajendra Chauhan has a few others
for company on the FTII body... They should also go."

The guns have fallen silent at the Film and Television Institute of
India after students returned to classrooms, calling off their 139-day
strike for the removal of institute chairman Gajendra Chauhan. But the
disquiet lingers as the government had stone-walled their demand. Now
the students have vowed to carry on the struggle through their films
and scripts. Shouldn’t the government assuage the deep sense of hurt
felt by the entire film fraternity? The answer lies in reconstituting
the general body of FTII. That’s the first step towards restoring the
health and wellbeing of India’s premiere film institution which has
produced some of the finest talents in the industry besides training
4,000 to 5,000 top order technicians in its 55-year-old history.
To let this imbroglio drag on is even an insult to the chairman who is
anyway unfit for the position. He may have got a lot of publicity but
it is all bad publicity. Have you heard anyone saying good things
about the choice of the chairman whose claims to eligibility are all
based on those few TV serial bit roles he played?

The FTII chairman should be a person of calibre, of national standing.
He cannot be just anybody. Mr Chauhan has a few others for company on
the FTII body, whom students have pointed out. They should also go.

I was the FTII chairperson twice and this is not merely my personal
opinion. Important filmmakers from abroad at the recent Goa film
festival urged the government to protect this globally respected
institution from further neglect and ill-treatment.

The government has made it a prestige issue, it seems. This is very
strange. Even royals have rescinded their decrees when mistakes were
pointed out by the wise and the experienced. We are living in a
democracy and the government should be responsive. It has already
invited a lot of flak and ill-will on this ground.

It was in the 1990s that the Centre decided to grant the FTII
autonomy, freeing it from the administrative control of information
and broadcasting ministry, thereby paving the way for availing the
knowledge and expertise of outstanding professionals in the film
industry. A society was constituted, incorporating experts in cinema,
theatre, arts, literature, journalism and other allied fields. They
and the nominated government officials make up the general body, which
in turn elects the governing council. Men and women of excellence in
their respective fields serve on the FTII society as laid down in its
constitution.

Now, strangely and questionably, the government has acted in clear
violation of the rules and regulations it had laid down. It has not
cared to consult experts and professionals. Among members nominated
were a few like Jahnu Barua, Santosh Sivan, Pallavi Joshi and Vidya
Balan, who are either FTII alumni or well-known for their
professionalism. But they all quit in protest against the government’s
apathy and insensitivity to the students’ representations. In effect,
the newly constituted general body now stands null and void without
these members.
Students and the film fraternity had a valid reason to agitate and it
was in a desperate move that they boycotted classes. It has to be
admitted that the struggle was very quiet and dignified; there was no
violence, nothing untoward. But extraneous elements, it seems, kept on
provoking the students and tried to give the impression that the
agitation was a law and order problem. Yet the students admirably kept
their cool and insisted on discussing with the government the issues
created by the new constitution of the society.

The government should have adopted the course of a dialogue, which is
the hallmark of democracy. No one expects any government to be an
expert in everything, not in the least cinema.

The government should have consulted experts before making the
nominations. It was a clear lapse. According to information received
through RTI, the people concerned had bypassed the list of
professionals prepared within the ministry. Being attached to a party
is no disqualification. But those on the governing council of the FTII
should be professionals of eminence as specified in the constitution
of the society.

The late U.R. Ananthamurthy, a Lohiaite, was twice its chief. He was
versatile and highly accomplished. Having such men at the helm is
necessary because it helps in meaningful interaction between
professionals leading to cross fertilisation of ideas. What would
non-professionals discuss when they sit together? What plan of action
will they chart for the FTII?
The institute’s society and governing council play a crucial role in
planning, designing academic schemes and the very future of the
students that cannot be left to bureaucrats and laymen. The chairman
should be one with vision and understanding to guide the
administration as well as the academics.

Student strikes are not new. When I took over as chairman, a strike
was on already. A student without sufficient attendance was barred
from appearing for the exam. We talked to students and convinced them
it was a violation of rules. It would also be a bad precedent to let
such a student sit for the exam. “So return to class and earn the
attendance to take the next chance,” I told the students and they did.
Being genuinely good to students and just being nice are different.

I am afraid culture and now education come last on the government’s
priority. They are systematically cutting down funds for them.

The institute requires a revamp. The upper age limit for admission had
been pegged at 45 years to attract talent from diverse fields. Miklos
Jancso, one of the greatest filmmakers of our time, joined the
Hungarian film institute at the age of 45. We were learning from such
instances.

It is a pity that the government has not paid heed to recommendations
to improve working conditions and emoluments for teachers, whose
salaries do not match even University Grants Commission scales. They
have to mould diligent professionals, who are selected from among
thousands to the 10 seats in each department.

Duration of the courses at the institute should be brought down to two
instead of the present three years. Classes should be from 9 am to 6
pm. There should not be scope for laxity. The three-year syllabus can
be taught in two years. The administration and students should work in
tandem, without the least coercion. The government should pull this
prestigious institute from the depths it has been pushed into. No
government is infallible. To correct a wrong is simply democratic.

The writer is one of the most acclaimed filmmakers in the country
-- 
Peace Is Doable

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Green Youth Movement" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to [email protected].
To post to this group, send an email to [email protected].
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/greenyouth.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Reply via email to