Big Brother’s Dharma Cola

Since its inception in 1960, the Film and Television Institute of India has given Indian cinema a steady flow of stalwarts in various disciplines of filmmaking. Arun Jaitley promised it the status of an institute of national importance in his budget speech last year. But now it seems to have been crushed in one stroke with the appointment of a small-time film and TV actor Gajendra Chauhan, best known for playing Yudhishthir in Mahabharata, as the chairman of the governing council. The purportedly ‘saffron decision’ made the students go on a protest strike. What does it mean for FTII? For now, the government has said it will talk to students if they stop the agitation; they are in no mood to relent. We spoke to some prominent film professionals, all FTII alumni, on how they view the situation.

Umesh Kulkarni,
Director of award-winning Vihir, Deool, graduated in 2005

FTII students are the ones who will navigate and shape Indian cinema in the future. Anyone who heads the institute, then, needs to have a vision and awareness of Indian cinema, world cinema, and a clear idea about the unique place our cinema occupies internationally. Every government does appoint people whom it favours, that’s a given. But certain basic qualifications have to be adhered to. We have had stalwarts like U.R. Ananthamurthy, Shyam Benegal, Saeed Akhtar Mirza occupying the spot. No one could question their credentials. Earlier, when controversy had erupted over the appointment of Pahlaj Nihalani as the CBFC chief, the film community had been assured that corrective action would be taken, but nothing happened. It’s the reason why I think these appointments need to be looked into in entirety. It’s not just about this specific case. There should be a policy for all such appointments. The government should specify the reasons why they picked someone for an important pos­ition. The idea floating around, that of the privatisation of FTII, is also una­cceptable. Government support allows talented, creative children from small towns and villages, low-inc­ome groups to get admission. Privatisation will change this texture. Today, apart from Bollywood, what represents the face of Indian cinema on a global platf­orm? It’s the institute’s students, whose work is everywhere. Gurvinder Singh’s Chau­thi Koot was shown this year at Cannes, Avi­nash Arun’s Killa was at Berlin. So things need to be thought out and cemented fast. We need someone who understands the sanctity of the institute to take it forward.

Resul Pookutty,
Sound Designer, Oscar-winner for Slumdog Millionaire, graduated in 1995

The whole appointment business is an app­alling fiasco. What can be gained out of it other than pleasing some politicians? I am in total sympathy with the students. The app­ointment may have triggered their reaction but there is a greater, long-standing issue here. Would the government have played the same way with an IIT or IIM? But from the mid- ’80s, the film institute has become a playground for whimsical governments. For appointing a principal of a college, you look for a credible person, an academic of repute. FTII seems to have no value; you can appoint just about anybody. It should be accorded the status and privileges of a university; it should be allotted funds and appointments be made under the UGC. Gajendra Chauhan has been saying that the institute hasn’t produced a film professional of repute since Raju Hirani. He holds an important position and talks wit­hout doing any basic fact-finding. Around 95 per cent of Indian award-winners in international film festivals are films that have been made by FTII graduates. How much more does it need to prove itself? Why should it carry this burden of scrutiny? Do we put the IIT and IIM alumni under a similar scanner? This, when FTII is one of the world’s most successful film institutes. But we give no value to exc­ellence in our own backyard. Just a few months ago, the government was speaking of it as a centre of excellence and now you are taking it back to the ‘70s. There is no concurrence with changing times. Several chairmen down the years have not been able to contribute in any significant way. Three-year courses are being dragged over eight years; there is a shortage of teachers; assistant professors are being paid a measly sum of `35,000, so no one wants to join the faculty. All these dormant issues have now taken centrestage.

Shaji N. Karun,
Director of award-winning Piravi, Swaham, Vanaprastham, graduated in 1975

Film education has changed a lot, so has our way of looking at films. Where do we stand now in the world of cinema, internationally speaking? We can barely compete with films from Cambodia, Thailand, Taiwan, China. There was a whole way of teaching cinema at the FTII with someone like Ritwik Ghatak at the helm. Cinema was seen as an art form; FTII was where cinema was celebrated. FTII still has to groom filmmakers. It has to be an academic, intellectual platform. What then is the vision of the government? It has to realise that culture can be an asset. But instead of elevating it, you are diluting FTII. But then inte­­lligence can’t be expected from this government.

Anil Mehta,
Veteran cinematographer from Hum Dil De Chuke Sanam to Badlapur, graduated in 1984

Traditionally GraFTII (FTII alumni association) has been in agreement with the students’ opinion. We will be mobilising support for them. The name of Gajendra Chauhan as the chairman of the governing council came out of the blue. Ironically, there are eminent people on the council itself. I don’t get the logic then of appointing him at the helm. The government has been talking about upgrading the institution to an institute of national eminence. Then why this? The government has moved two steps back with this decision. I simply can’t reconcile myself to this. At the moment, FTII is neither a university nor a standalone college. It gives diplomas, not degrees; it doesn’t have UGC affiliation. I also see a pattern here. Pahlaj Nihalani’s appointment as CBFC chief was a similar embarrassment. Rajyavardhan Singh Rathore spoke to film people to reassure them that they were all for certification rat­her than censoring. With this decision, they have repeated the embarrassment. FTII is a unique institute. At this juncture, with changing technology, it needs upgradation, it needs digital labs. There are logistical issues like courses not getting over on time. You need someone who knows the ground reality. You need someone with the bandwidth to engage with these issues and I don’t see that prima facie. You need someone with width and vis­ion and a sense of history as to what FTII has meant as a cultural entity.

Rajkummar Rao,
Actor, Shahid, Citylights, Queen, graduated 2008

I don’t know Gajendra Chauhan but I do know that for an institute of national importance like the FTII, the chairman has to be someone who has done significant work in films. The protest by students is understandable. After all, their careers are at stake. They are missing classes, devoting their energy to prot­ests. You have to be in the institute to understand it and the special bond you forge with it. It’s their second home, the attachment and connect are strong. FTII is behind some quality cinema and filmmakers. It needs to be given its due value, be regarded as an institute of national importance. What you need is a visionary, someone who understands cinema and the ins­titute’s importance in the cinematic world.