“Poets are the unacknowledged legislators of the society”, said Percy Bysshe Shelley in 19th-century England while critiquing the many colonial projects his motherland was going strong with. Sitting in the House of Lords, Shelley and his friend Byron critiqued the policies of England towards the colonies as well as at home. It may have achieved precious little other than bolstering the faith that the custodians of culture also had a conscience.
Looking around today, nothing appears further from the truth.
Cinema, the most popular vehicle of culture in India, is dealing with an existential question: Where does my loyalty lie? The question is more biting for the Mumbai-based Hindi cinema industry because of its scale; it’s relevant to other languages, too. But let’s not write yet another lament piece on it. This act has become tedious.
We need to talk about what George Orwell called a “courageous mouse”. Artists trying their best to maintain conscience, their own and that of society. Courageous Mouse Kathryn Bigelow’s latest release on Netflix, A House of Dynamitehas divided not just the audience but also policy wonks and defense experts in the US. Bigelow couldn’t be happier, regardless of the success of the film.
“In a perfect world, culture has the potential to drive policy,” Bigelow said, in response to the Pentagon’s critique of the film. The mighty ministry of war is not happy with the film’s portrayal of the missile defense capabilities of the US. There’s an internal memo critiquing the film’s poetic license, and there’s the response from the makers. That’s it. Nobody is calling Bigelow for a meeting in the White House to chastise her. Netflix isn’t being summoned to threaten its operations.
With all the prickliness of the current regime in the US, its residual ability to deal with dissent remains admirable. Bigelow’s film is a dissection of the crisis management machinery of the most powerful country in the world, and the exposé is anything but flattering. From phones not being answered to bad network connection to bumbling decision makers to commanders too blase to care, to a president entirely out of his depth on warfare — the film showcases it all.
The most important thing about A House of Dynamite is not the cinematic competence or realism of the film. It is the film’s very existence. That a filmmaker can share her vision, at odds with the State, without fear of reproach or retribution is a privilege that many have squandered unthinkingly. It is the same privilege that the makers of Slow Horsesan Apple TV series, have been exercising season after season. In its latest season, the UK is facing the destabilization it inflicted on many countries, literally step by step. Jackson Lamb, aging and garrulous ace spy and patriot, doesn’t mince his words while berating the incompetence of his MI5 and MI6 colleagues, the corruption of politicians, and the damaging policies of the UK government. Season after season, the audience roots for him and the bunch of loser spies (slow horses) of the Slough House, whom he’s forced to be in charge of.
The ease with which certain cultural products chide the State openly in some parts of the world is a matter of envy. Or maybe it’s not. We strive for what we envy and covet. “Envy is an indispensable motivator of human achievement, even if it must be tamed by social norms,” said sociologist Helmut Schoeck. Since the mainstream culture doesn’t care for freedom to offend anymore, perhaps this freedom is not worth having.
Coming back to Bigelow’s film, despite the robustness of the American militainment culture, the acknowledgment of the fallibility of the country’s most sophisticated and ambitious weapon systems — its ballistic missile defenses — is not a regular feature of realistic films, shows, and literature. Most criticism of such nature is left best for satire and fantasy genres. To be able to build on existing discursive freedoms and push the envelope of cultural production is what artists are supposed to do. That’s what TS Eliot called “individual talent” thriving amidst tradition.
But maybe we are in the era of post-criticism. On that uncritical note, let’s watch another war film where the protagonist is a superhero as well as a Shakespearean romantic, and makes everything possible under the guidance of honourables.
Nishtha Gautam is an author and academician. The views expressed are personal
