56 INDIATODAY AUGUST 19, 2019
whenyouhadmillworkersmakeheadlinesatthetimeofour
economicdevelopmentinthe’70s,AmitabhBachchan’s‘An-
gry YoungMan’personabecamepopular.Whatfilmsspeak
of isveryconnectedtothetimeinwhichthey’remade.
Patriotismincinemaisalsoshapedinpartbythe
sensibilityofafilmanditsmaker.TakeLagaan(2001),for
instance.WhiletheBritishweretheclearenemies,thefilm’s
villagerswerealsofightingpoverty.Theywerealsofighting
drought.Whentheyfinallywintheclimacticcricketmatch,
theyaren’tjusthappybecausetheyhavedefeatedtheBritish,
theyhavealsodefeatedadversity.Theirelationisthatofthe
humanspirit.Theiraccomplishmentisthatofanunderdog
gettingitsmomentinthesun.Lagaan,forme,wasnotjust
anotherpatrioticfilm.Itwasastoryofcourage.
S
imilarly,whenItookonRaazi(2018),andwe
wentthroughtheusualprocessesofwriting,
shooting,productionandediting,itdidnotonce
crossmymindthatIwasmakinga‘patriotic
film’.Forme,thefilmtoldastoryofstrength,of
thatindomitablehumanspiritandofthefutilityofwar.It
wasonlywhenweputtogetherthefirstcutdidwerealisethat
the filmwastalkingaboutalotmore.
Ifyounotice,youwillnotonceseetheIndianflagin
Raazi.Nowherewillyoufindthenationalanthemorarendi-
tionof‘VandeMataram’beingusedasabackgroundtheme.
To tellastoryoftruegritwasmyintent.Ididn’twantto
impartalessononpatriotism.Whatdrewmetomyprotago-
nist,Sehmat(AliaBhatt),wasthatsomeonelikeheronce
existed.Forme,thecharacterwasarolemodel,aninspira-
tion.Watchinghercangratifyandelevateyou.Hersisthe
realstoryIwantedtotell.
Itwasonlyincidentalthatwhenpeoplestartedwatching
the film, and when critics started writing
their review, did the film come to mean more
than what we had set out with. Here was a
film that looked at patriotism differently. It
showed you could be patriotic without having
to resort to jingoism.
When we were writing up the characters of
Sehmat’s Pakistani family, we, perhaps uncon-
sciously, ensured that nationalism didn’t condi-
tion their behaviour, their actions or decisions.
So, when you see these Pakistani characters in
relation to Sehmat, she seems the villain. She
is the one destroying an entire family. But then
you juxtapose that realisation with the reasons
of why she is doing what she is doing, and sud-
denly there is redemption. Remove her motiva-
tion, though, and she is again the antagonist.
Her Pakistani family is not. Humanising ‘the
enemy’, while keeping Sehmat’s moral compass
intact was a challenge. One little tip on either
side would have made the balance very murky.
Sentimentality doesn’t bother me so much,
but my alarms do go off when self-righteous-
ness parades as sentiment. If I am portraying
Sehmat’s patriotism in the film, I must also
speak of her husband Iqbal’s love for his country.
Why should one patriotism come at the cost of
another? If we have our patriotism, we ought to
let them have theirs. For me to love my country,
I don’t have to hate another.
In the end, it is always intent that matters
most. When we made Talvar (2015), we never
wanted to ride the wave of controversy. We
wanted to tell both sides of the story because the
reporting, we felt, had been skewed. We didn’t
have a solution to offer. We only wanted to put
all the information out there. It is that intent
which, I think, shows through. Portrayals of
patriotism are similar in that respect.
My depictions of patriotism, however
unconscious, are impacted by my intent. My
country, for me, is my people, my city, and my
environment. It’s certainly not an ideology. I
do not have to tattoo the tricolour on my face
to express love for my country. I believe that if
I immerse myself in work, I can come up with
a little something that might help make this
nation better.Meghna Gulzaris a filmmaker.
As told to Shreevatsa NevatiaMYCOUNTRY, FOR ME,
ISMYPEOPLE, MY CITY,
ANDMYENVIRONMENT.
ITISCERTAINLY NOT
AN IDEOLOGY. I DO NOT
HAVE TO TATTOO THE
TRICOLOUR ON MY FACE
TO EXPRESS LOVE FOR
MY COUNTRY