Kabir Khan, director of major Salman Khan films such as Bajrangi Bhaijaan, Ek Tha Tiger and more recently, Tubelight, has two big gigs this year: Amazon Prime Videoâs new show, The Forgotten Army (on Subhash Chandra Boseâs Azad Hind Fauj), which drops this Sunday, and â83, the story of Indiaâs World Cup win featuring Ranveer Singh as Kapil Dev.
Over the years, Khan has cemented his position in the Hindi film industry as a mainstream director who is politically conscious. His films, he says, are an extension of his politics.
Writing in The Indian Express last month in the backdrop of the massive protests against the divisive Citizenship Amendment Act, he had said that he could âforgive a bad screenplay, but I canât forgive bad politicsâ.
In this interview with HuffPost India, the director spoke about what it means to be an artist in times of Narendra Modi, the collective responsibility and why the jingoistic narrative ought to be countered.
Excerpts:
Youâve been speaking about âThe Forgotten Armyâ for a while and itâs clearly one of your passion projects.
After every film, this is a script that Iâve picked up. But whatâs different now is that itâs also a marriage of the right platform and the subject. Iâm glad I did it as an original series.
You mean the long-form storytelling format is more conducive to a project such as this?
Not just that. I also feel certain mainstream limitations of say, language,wouldâve probably put a little constraint. The whole attempt to attain a certain pace in mainstream cinema would not help me put down the historical context correctly. In a long-form original series, I can do that. This is the format that needs to be used to tell the story in all its complexity.
How did you manage the time to shoot â83 (the World Cup film with Ranveer Singh) and this? Were you shooting simultaneously?
No, I wasnât. It looks like I was but it didnât overlap. We had finished the shoot for Forgotten Army before we started the prep for â83. But yes, there was one team working on â83 while Forgotten Army was happening. Both these subjects demanded huge amounts of research. There was around one-and-a-half years of research on Forgotten Army and close to two years of research on â83. I finished and edited Forgotten Army and then left for â83. The reason why it took so much time was because of the VFX. These were two separate journeys but today it looks like an overlap.
â83 is being touted as one of the most awaited films of the year.
â83 is a great story. I donât know what happens at the box office and all but itâs an amazing story. Itâsâas a filmmaker, despite it being a true storyâitâs the best story that Iâve ever read in my entire life.
Really? And Iâm guessing you have a lot of behind the scenes...
Yeah, there are a lot of things that people do not know and I was shocked when I sat down with the 14 cricketers and took down their stories. I thought how could their stories not have been told for the last 35 years? It is unbelievable! It is the best underdog story that Iâve ever heard in my life. Itâs about a bunch of boys who landed in London with every newspaper writing them off and saying these jokers should not even have been invited because they canât achieve anything in One Day International. And those bunch of boys pulled each other up to go and win the World Cup.
I mean yeah, you cannot not root for them.
Yeah, absolutely. Because itâs cricket, itâs also an India story. Simply put, itâs a coming-of-age story of a country. Cricket is a medium through which you say the story. So itâs not only about those boys but also whatâs happening to Indians around the world at that point in time and that adds another layer to it.
Given the current context, youâre dabbling into a territory that has been tarnished by the jingoistic narrative that has taken over. Weâve seen a slew of mainstream films that depict Muslims as barbaric demons. My question is: how tricky is it to depict patriotism without fetishising it or blindly demonising the other side?
To show someoneâs patriotism, you donât need to show a counterpoint or the enemy to be particularly evil. You donât. Forgotten Army doesnât do that, it shows true beautiful patriots without demonising anybody because at the end of the day everybody is human, this side and that side.
In Forgotten Army, there are a lot of dilemmas. What are they fighting and who are they fighting? Theyâre fighting their fellow Indians too. All that is discussed and spoken about in the series. But thereâs a different ethos to it and thatâs the difference between patriotism and nationalism. Thatâs the subtle sense that Forgotten Army has.
And youâre right, I have been uncomfortable with certain narratives in history where thereâs an attempt to dehumanise Muslims or Mughals. Now, itâs a historical fact that a lot of Muslims invaded India but that had nothing to do with religion. It only had to do with territory. In the medieval times, if there was any king strong enough to go and occupy another kingdom, he would go and do it. So when Babur comes in to invade India, who does he find? Ibrahim Lodi. He doesnât say that âoh this is my Muslim brother, let me not fight himâ or âIâll leave him and fight a Hindu Rajputâ. No, he wanted Delhi and Ibrahim Lodi had Delhi so he went for him. And who did Lodi take it from? From the Tughlaqs! So itâs never been about religion. Today all the battles are being presented in a binaryâas if they were between Hindus and Muslims which is so unfair. Itâs unfair to history and unfair to the people itâs being presented to.
Yes, and it works because itâs an easier, narrative to believe, falls into the ideological canon of the current dispensation and contributes to the othering of Muslims.
Yeah absolutely. Even the attempt of renaming the roads that were named after Mughal emperors completely negates any role that the Mughals played in nation building. I mean, really? All the history we read about Mughals in nation building was all false?
As a filmmaker, as someone who is right in the middle of the culture, how do you counter that narrative which is so powerful and in some cases, state-sanctioned? This is a very specific ideological project that has the most sophisticated apparatus advancing its cause.
You just have to keep putting the counter-narrative and you have to keep doing it. If you give that up then youâre letting them win. You have to keep pushing it harder. All of us who feel that a wrong narrative is being spun, they need to stand up and put forward a counter-narrative. We have to fight the wrong information.
Propaganda, letâs call it what it really is.
Yeah, propaganda.
But tell me something, when you see back-to-back films that are well, essentially, government pamphlets masquerading as movies, do you feel something more conscious at play? Whatâs your reading of it? Is it systematic?
I wouldnât know if there is a systematic process to it. Once a narrative catches on, people feel emboldened to repeat it and feel that thatâs the right narrative to repeat because it will be more popular with the people. I think thatâs what happened. Whether itâs been backed or organised in a certain way, I donât know
But itâs sad that the atmosphere is such that people are beginning to believe such narratives. People are compelled to bring out such narratives and feel like this works. Therefore, people who have another point of view, all we have to do is keep putting the counter-narrative to offset that.
If I want to present Forgotten Army with my politics, I need to push it out. If I want to present â83 with my narrative, I have to push it out. Anything that I push out which reflects my politics will probably counter the politics that I donât agree with.
Itâs also about popularity. If itâs a more popular narrative, then more and more people will join it. Thatâs what it happening.
Do you believe that the majority is silently consenting to this idea? After several filmmakers and actors joined the protest against the attacks at JNU, allegedly by ABVP, there were people trolling them. I mean what are they calling out here exactly? Even if you leave CAA-NRC, itâs about armed goons attacking university students and thatâs like, you know, wrong.
Absolutely. I am an optimist, I would always like to believe that the majority does not silently consent. I donât think any right-minded Indian can agree with goons with masks going into a premium university of our country and attacking and violently beating up students. No right-minded Indian will agree. I will be shocked if anyone can say that I am proud of this as an Indian. I donât think they can do that. I would hate to see the day that it happens. I donât think that they can in any way agree with what is happening with these universities. Iâm not saying that Iâm naive. Iâm not saying that there are no prejudices in society. Prejudices are being fed and nurtured but I would not like to believe that the majority agrees with this.
In The Indian Express, you wrote that you feel conscious about your religious identity, which kind of also hints at how broken the system is. You shouldnât be made to realise where you come from. Would you say that your ideology percolates into your work and cinema?
Yeah, of course it will. Even if youâre making a historical film, itâs always going to be relevant to the contemporary times. There will be a political statement. Even in the trailer you can see that. Mayaâs character in the show says that it doesnât matter which caste, race, culture or religion youâre from. As long as youâre Indian, you can join the Azad Hind Fauj. Nobodyâs going to ask you how much of an Indian you are to fight. If you believe youâre Indian, you will stand up for your country and fight.
Thereâs no loyalty test.
Exactly! Why should there be?
Theyâre institutionalising it.
Yeah absolutely.
In that context, I think the showâs politics is very relevant.
It is absolutely relevant to the current times.
Help me understand if Iâm not on the right thought here but today, when we talk of rebellion or revolution we look at it through the prism of the Gandhian ideology of non-violence. The story youâre tellingâabout Boseâis about an armed revolution. How do you negotiate a line where you are able to portray the account without justifying violence as a means of protest, which could easily be appropriated by the Right?
Weâre living in a time where everything seems to be black and white. Itâs like if youâre taking this point of view then itâs contrary to that. Itâs not. In no way does Forgotten Army take away from what Gandhi and Nehru have achieved for this country. It is just telling you another aspect of the freedom struggle which is the reason why Iâm making this is. You can judge them, you can always say that it was the wrong approach, you can always say that this isnât the way India wanted independence but at least get to know what they did.
Donât sit without knowing what they did. Itâs not necessary that itâs always contrary to something, it is not at all a binary. Iâve seen that the Azad Hind Fauj and Netaji were getting appropriated by the right wing also and being presented as counter Nehru. Iâd like to put out a point. The two largest brigades in Boseâs armyâthere were 5 in allâthe two largest ones were called the Gandhi brigade and the Nehru brigade.
Ideological difference does not mean that there was personal enmity there. Todayâs politicians donât understand that there could be an ethos where you are ideologically different. Who was the gentleman who fought the red foot trials on behalf of the Azad Hind Fauj? It was Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru and his father Motilal Nehru. Despite the fact that he publicly said that he doesnât believe in the armed struggle. These are the nuances that get lost. In the first military review of the Azad Hind Fauj where Netaji took the salute, standing with General Tocho of Japan with 30,000 soldiers standing, there is only one portrait hanging above their heads. Itâs Mahatma Gandhi. These are the nuances that get thrown away because they want to present it as per their agendasâas if it was Nehru vs Patel.
Finally, I know you donât speak on behalf of the industryâ
Because the industry is comprised of so many different people and ideologies. How can I speak for so many?
Of course not but donât you think that maybe now itâs time? Because itâs become impossible to look away. History is going to judge every artist, painter, writer, comedian, lawyer, journalist who are bearing witness to this moment in time. Could there be a certain sort of communion or people coming together in a more organised way? I understand individual fears, I understand why the Khans wonât speak but if the industry shows collective support, how many theatres are they going to vandalise?
I think thatâs already happening. Maybe not happening in an organised way of putting it together but it is happening. Youâve seen that, even last night, a large number of people in the industry came out. I didnât even know about it, I got to know a few hours later when I was stuck somewhere and couldnât make it. But it happened right? It is already happening and like they say, courage, like fear is contagious. You know one speaks, the second will speak and then more will speak and thatâs what is happening.
I donât think it needs to be done with a strategy or in an organised way, I think organically is the best way. You will see, I know so many people who wanted to stop everything and drive down to Gateway of India and sit with those students. If I was free, I wouldâve gone. And thatâs going to happen. Thatâs how it should happen, thatâs the only way it will sustain. If you try to organise and match peopleâs schedules to come for a meeting to protest, it wonât happen. People need to feel it from within. I am not a political activist. There are people speaking today that didnât speak ten days ago. Something mustâve happened in these ten days. They mustâve seen someone speaking up and thought âhey, I feel the same wayâ.
What are your conversations like with your other famous friends?
Iâve spoken to a lot of people who probably have publicly not expressed their positions and theyâre deeply disturbed.
Is there fear?
There must be, Iâve not questioned them because itâs incorrect of me to question them. Iâm no one to judge them for that, whatever their reasons are. Itâs also a sad reflection of the times weâre living in. Where is the fierce independent media that will protect you? Itâs not there. Where is the civil society that will come outside your house and protect you when their effigies are being burnt? Where is it? If we cannot go to protect them then we cannot go and push them to speak up. We should do what we feel is comfortable for us. I feel I want to speak up, so I will. I donât want to rub it in anyoneâs face.
I donât think itâs an unfair expectation.
Itâs not! I would love it if everybody spoke up but I feel itâs unfair to keep pushing them. It has to come from within and it might.
I agree with you but then maybe also donât click those selfies. You canât say I am apolitical and then hang with the man.
We donât know what compelled them to do that. Their silence is also a reflection of what made them click those selfies. How do we know? We are assuming that everyone in that frame went happily, maybe they didnât.
Some grudgingly, some happily, who knows.
Yeah, we should not start making this into âhey youâre not standing up and being accounted forâ and I think thatâs unfair. Leave them, give them their space, let them think it through and be comfortable and they will come out. If the right to speak is your democratic right then the right to remain silent is also your democratic right. Letâs not push it. I think it becomes counterproductive. People have to come out and speak when theyâre comfortable.