Democracy in U.S

Democracy in America is more than just electoral politics. It is based on the shortest and the oldest written constitution of any sovereign state. This constitution provides the framework for the organization and functioning of the US government which is federal in nature. It also defines three main legs of the government: the legislative branch, the executive branch and the judicial branch. The legislative with a bicameral congress consisting of the House of Representatives as the lower house and the Senate as the upper house, the executive led by the president and the judiciary headed by the supreme court. This organization is quite similar to that of Indian constitution.
The executive leg of the government holds the responsibility for enforcing laws. The president, the vice president, cabinet ministers and heads of independent agencies are responsible for the functions of executive branch. As per Article I of the constitution, the Legislative is the law making branch of the government. The Judicial branch decides the meaning of laws and how they are applied. The violation of laws is checked by the judicial review. The judicial branch, in a similar way as the Indian judiciary does, keeps a check on the legislative and executive branches. There are separate laws governing the federal and the state and at any given point of time, if at all there is a conflict between the federal and the state, the ideas of the federal will be honored over those of the state. Unlike Indian electoral system, in US, people vote to select the Electoral College, which is a body of people who vote for the presidential representative of any one of the political parties. This provides equal importance to each state irrespective of its population and other factors which might influence the electoral process.


SUNEET SHUKLA

Lust for the label

Cinema in India is something which has maintained its originality in spite of the fact that it came to us through the west, when Lumiere brothers broadcasted the first moving picture in Indian history. Even though the technique came from the west, the Indian style and approach were completely different from how west perceived this technique of capturing moving pictures. Including songs was a feature of Indian cinema which made it stand apart from the world cinema and evolved a film as a more colorful, cultural and entertaining medium.

Over decades the world cinema has observed this contrast in Indian film industry and undoubtedly is attracted towards this vibrant style. Probably this is the reason why Danny Boyle turned towards India to turn an Indian author's best selling book into “Slumdog Millionaire”-the winner of 8 Oscars. After decades of mere attendance of Indian movies at Oscars, it was was finally the night when those eyes didn't had to turn over the shoulder to notice the magical element of Indian cinema, because it was right there under the spotlight and not at those corners, which as a typecast were alloted to us.

The pinnacles of world cinema tapped their feet and minds to the tunes of Rahman's “jai ho”.

It was the story of an orphan turning into a millionaire which swept away almost all the major awards except The Best Actor and The Best Actress which went to Sean Penn and Kate Winslet respectively. Apart from Resul Pookutty who grabbed the award for music editing, the veteran maestros of bollywood music, A.R.Rahman and Gulzar Sahab were elated by their international recognition. Fresh faces and “dogs” from Indian slums got to walk the red carpet. These were the children who enacted their real life as part of their reel life. The story shows how various instances in the life of a kid in a slum pushes him through the turmoils of life in such a fortunate manner that every incident in his life is an answer to the million dollar question he encounters in a game show! His is the story of the struggle for survival at every point and his craving to find the love he lost as a child .

This “slumdog” runs through all the filth in this world while chasing the lost innocence of his life. This chase reveals the postcards of India which are the general perception of west about our nation. Begging, stealing, gambling, prostitution, murder, extortion are the only professions known to Indians. Life here is all about poverty, corruption and crime and majority of us live in slums. The jury at the academy probably found “Slumdog Millionaire” much realistic and satisfying to their perceptions.

Prior to this we have sent many other masterpieces which have failed to generate the recognitions they received into awards. From Mother India to Lagaan and Salaam Bombay to Water, all the entries from India have been appreciated but never awarded. This calls for an analysis over the reasons which barred these films to pull the spotlights on the final day. Comparing these movies to “Slumdog...” I don't find them lagging behind at any front. Probably all of these movies had a much better storyline which was more realistic and natural. Even technically they were nevertheless. It was the same Rahman who composed for Lagaan in which every song was an epitome of music. No story could have been more realistic and emotional than Mother India and no one portrayed the pains of a “dream city” better than Mira Nair in Salaam Bombay. Comprising of power packed performances by some infamous talented actors like Raghuveer Yadav, Nana Patekar, Irrfaan Khan etc, this movie is considered a milestone in the inclusion of hard hitting realistic scripts in the Indian film industry.

Other than these films, there have been many other creations by young talented film makers which were good enough to compete with the best of world cinema. For example consider movies like Dharm, Maine Gandhi ko nahi maara, Haasil, Black Friday, Shaurya, Encounter, Gulaal, Hazaaron khwhishein aisi, Rang De Basanti, Taare zameen par and Parzania. These names suggest that there is no lack of quality or variety in Indian movies. Is it probably because india and Indians are shown as a poor country and suffering beggars respectively, that “Slumdog...” managed eight academy awards.

“ Laagan” where hardworking hard working farmers revolt and defeat colonialists in their own game to avoid payment of revenues is not acceptable to the Oscar authority. In spite of being technically and artistically excellent and in spite of Aamir Khan's hard efforts “Laagan” couldn't convince the jury of its genius.

But the whole point is, why do we give such importance to academy awards? Is an academy award necessary to prove a films worth or an artist's talent? There definitely lies some problem back home too. Why don't we have any problem with “Slumdog...” when “Indians are shown a little bit of America”. We probably will have problem with any movie like Parzania which shows what went wrong in Godhara, or Black Friday which uncovers the '93 blasts in Mumbai, or Water which shows the atrocities of Devadasi system.

We basically shouldn't have any issues with “Slumdog Millionaire” winning at Oscars. But its victory along with immense happiness, brings along some unexplainable questions. Amidst the hoop-la in celebrating this success we forget to applaud the efforts in domestic cinema. Films like Dev D, Gulaal, A Wednesday, Mumbai meri jaan etc, need to be appreciated and the talents behind these works need to be recognized.

Legends of Indian cinema like Amitabh Bachchan and Anupam Kher do not consider Oscars to be the hallmark of success and quality. These are some personal opinions. If in future any Indian film manages to rope in an academy award without having any foreign connections, then probably some doubts might get cleared. Irrespective of the run to the Oscars, I just hope that our cinema develops in a more qualitative and meaningful way. The most powerful and influential media shall prove its worth.