Let me start by saying this. PK is a good film. Its a funny film. It has a breezy pace without being too preachy or pedantic. Somehow, Aamir and Raju Hirani have mastered the art of handling difficult subjects with disarming humour and charming characters. Religion is an extremely difficult subject in any country, and doubly so in India. They deserve congratulations for their attempt.
I was a little angry as I walked out of the theatre. Some aspects of the movie definitely irked me. The scene where PK 'installs' a rock near an examination center, smears it with paan and places some money in front of it, to demonstrate to Jaggu's (Anushka) father that this would now become a small make-shift temple where all the exam-goers would prostrate, owing to fear of the exam. Albeit true in many circumstances, I felt irritated at this scene. Of course the infamous "Jo darta hain, woh mandir jaata hain" is a dialogue, in my opinion loaded with some very specific negative references.
My irritation only increased as I saw #BoycottPK all over Twitter. Many of my fellow Hindus were offended, hurt and downright insulted by some of the aspects of this film. My feelings were only aggravated and incensed by the fact that so many people were up-in-arms against this film, FIRs, Posters, et al. However, after some thought, my perceptions stand as follows:
To be fair, PK has identified negative practices of many religions, but Hinduism is the clear reference point. However, in my opinion, If PK had used Islam or Christianity as a reference point (as opposed to Hinduism) to showcase some of the unfortunate aspects of religion and religious godmen/women, it would have been banned in India and several other countries. Such an affront (even the slightest) would have been seen as an agenda to quash said religions and their religious beliefs. There would have been several minorities groups that would have taken serious offence and would have had this filmed banned with political clout, or worse.
I feel that the filmmakers have taken a calculated risk to use Hinduism as a reference point because it does not evoke such strong responses. I am sure that they have considered the fact that its one of the few religions in the world that tolerates even a potential affront on its practices and its constituents. That precisely, is why I am proud to be a Hindu. Confused? Let me explain.
My Dharma is one of tolerance and mutual respect. I would rather be part of a Dharma that respects and tolerates questions and even accepts criticisms from its own constituents and others, rather than suffer from the problems that associate with zealotry. Hinduism as a concept is a diverse, broad and highly effective religious framework that allows for the existence of chaos, karma and diversity without causing the deaths of countless lives, to religious fanaticism. Evidenced by the millions of deities we pay homage to. Hinduism has survived through centuries of invasions, from the Muslim rule to the British, only because of this acceptance of diversity, chaos and imperfections. No religious order is perfect, but Hinduism takes that in its stride, unlike no other.
Also, I find it strange when we feel the need to defend ourselves against filmmakers and entertainers. If thousands of years of foreign invasions, temple desecrations, forced conversions, predatory tax practices and 'secular' interventions have not destroyed the Hindu Dharma, its laughable to think that an insignificant Bollywood Comedy, from an industry that produces fare like "Humshakals", can bring doom upon our culture and faith.
I am left with two choices. One - I rail against PK for its insult to my culture. Or Two - I watch the movie. Accept that no religion is perfect. Take what's good. Leave out the innuendo and go about my day.
I think I choose option 2. What do you choose?
