Suckers always get punched-TamBrahms Matter Too !

 I always have been a great admirer of  Avant Garde Film maker Manirathnam. Right from his vintage "Mouna raagangal" & "Nayakan"  -which have been my all time favourites -which I never tire of watching time and again. Later day Manirathnam movies, of course, carry a a severe dose of commercial cinema compelled compromises, which do leave a slight bad after taste. You stop cherishing those films like you did with the first two mentioned. But , at any given time ,they are ,by far ,better several times over  than the run of the mill kind which gets turned out by Kollywood. Given a choice, the former will be an automatic preference.

Mani, like Steven Spielberg rides on his meticulously assembled team- Cinematographer P.C.Sriram, A.R.Rahman (or Ilayaraja before Rahman replaced him as  the permanent accompaniment for Mani),Art Director Thota Tharani- No wonder, Masters in their own craft. Mani is like Mahi Dhoni -calm, cool, low visibility except on the field, highly private "Me Time " person.

As an 'Auteur" every film maker is entitled to their leanings- political, ideological, linguistic and so on.

In fact, many use the medium to advance such affiliations- take the case of the Dravidian movie Moguls, M/s.Annadurai, Karunanidhi, MGR. All of them, exploited the theatre audience to the hilt. Which also showered the coveted Chief Ministership to all the three. So did NT Ramarao in AP , the only difference being , his only ideology was to just  restore the pride of Telugus.

I am not attempting an analysis of how movies win you political power. My focus is on only  one issue which bugs me. The portrayal of Tamil Brahmins . I am not talking of Brahmin Artists- they were a plenty: Gemini Ganesans, Jayalalithas.

There have always been  sober and dignified portrayals of the community  in olden day films except those authored by the likes of Annadurai.

Kalki's Thyagabhumi for instance.

Even later day Sivaji Ganesan, did remarkable roles like Prestige Padhmanabhan, Barrister Rajinkanth etc. 

K.Balachandar did expose the vulnerability of the community in his films like Arangetram , Ethirneechal etc.

Mani himself , has been  reasonably fair, in Brahmin characterization in the roles of "Iyer" in Nayakan, Charu Haasan in Thalapathy etc. Neither a eulogy nor an insulting portrayal. A real politk essaying.

But,what Mani did in his last film ,Chekka Sivandha Vaanam, has slipped by many.

In the scene, where the Brothers trio of Arvindswamy, Arun and Chimpu rummage  a brothel house to locate the assassins of their father Prakash Raj, several customers are seen barging out in the melee.

What Mani's cameraman zooms in is on the back of one such men, clearly displaying his "Yagnobaveetham"- the sacred thread , mostly worn by Brahmins. 

What does Mani want to demonstrate? That Brahmins are no strangers to visiting brothels? A thread donning Brahmin can also indulge with equal ease in sins of the flesh? 

In an understandably similar scene in "Parimelerum Perumal" ( a brilliant film by any standards- I can not recall the struggles of an aspiring  lawyer from a downtrodden community being portrayed with such idiom and elan) produced by the acclaimed noveau film maker, Pa.Ranjith :

  In a country liquor bar, the protagonist and his wealthy co student are consuming liquor. The man ,sitting behind the duo, speaks to them in a typical Tamil Brahmin dialect. Of course in a tipsy way.

I am not , for a moment, professing that all Brahmins are holy and are devoid of such vices. 

What is the need to identify, th caste symbols of a particular community, in such non descript immaterial scenes?

Can a Sikh gentlemen wearing his turban or a Muslim wearing his Skull cap ,be ever dared to be used in such scenes?

Then, why pick Brahmins?

Do these revolutionary  artists have to resort to throw muck on a specific .so called " Upper caste " to express their political mindsets? So subtle but definitely one, not to be missed- particularly by the community at the receiving end?

It is not to be forgotten that when Mani wanted to release" Bombay " wherein he had figuratively characterized cameo role , of the 'Tiger of Mumbai"; he stuck a deal with the latter political Honcho, to water down the portrayal? Lest that film  would have never seen the arc light of projectors in Bollywood.

Nor can we sleep over the fact that miscreants from a particular community hurled petrol bombs at Mani's Chennai  residence ,after release of that film?

Nothing of that genre greeted Mani and their ilk, vis a vis Tamil Brahmins.

We, tender an apology , you great film makers.

We are incapable of either lumpening or bomb making.

We will grin and bear this too. And keep Box Office tills ringing.

After all, this is a "Secular " nation where freedom of expression- which community you can vilify is unlimited.

Only there are few exceptions . You can exercise your freedom against these  exceptional groups, at your own peril!