Talks between the government and students have been inconclusive so far in the FTII ‘Mahabharat’
“We believe Gajendra Chauhan does not have the credentials needed to head a premier institute like FTII. When he was asked what his favourite film is, he said ‘Three Idiots’, and when he was asked about his favourite international film, he refused to respond and said his gambit is Indian cinema. He lacks the vision needed to shape the policies of an institute like FTII” said Ameya Gore, spokesperson for students at Film and Television Institute of India (FTII), while talking to FPJ correspondent Eeshanpriya M S, about the ongoing unrest over Gajendra Chauhan’s appointment as Chairman of the institute.
Q. What problems do you have with Gajendra Chauhan’s appointment as chairman of FTII?
A. Our opposition is not against any individual, it is against the idea of controlling the education system. We are fighting for a cause larger than Chauhan’s appointment. We do not have a problem with the political affiliation of our head, but that must not be the only criterion for appointment of an institute’s chairperson. Moreover, we believe Gajendra Chauhan lacks the credentials needed to head an institute like FTII. The only qualification the chairman needs to have is a ‘person of eminence in film, television, art or education’ but we believe Chauhan doesn’t fulfill this criterion.
Q. So Chauhan’s appointment as chairman of FTII is a political one?
A. We agree Chauhan’s appointment is not a blatantly political one, but the government has been acting in ways of hijacking such key institutes of our country. Many appointments made to the Censor board earlier this year and Mukesh Khanna’s appointment as head of Children’s Film Society are examples of such blunders. FTII has had a history of liberal thought, of promoting alternate cinema and of keeping scope for dissent. There are no restrictions on the kind of films we make, or the films we watch. So far, we have not had to take permission from the institute’s administration before making an anti-establishment film or films following any particular ideology, but this appointment seeks to change that.
Q. Who would you like to see as the chairman then?
A. I would not like to take any name. Many names come to my mind but students are not allowed to suggest names anyway. We want it to be someone who will uphold the spirit of FTII. Our only demand is that it should be a person with strong credentials. The government said it approached many other eminent personalities who all refused to take up Chairmanship. An RTI reply found that Gajendra Chauhan was the only person they approached. It (the government) does that. A Central minister told a leading newspaper that the government spends over Rs 12 lakh per year per FTII student. An RTI reply revealed it spends 2.5 lakh.
Q. What are your other demands?
A. The other members appointed to the board also lack credentials. Anagha Ghaisas, Narendra Pathak, Pranjal Saikia and Rahul Solapurkar are all in one way or another, very close to the BJP. One of them has been declared by the courts to have no knowledge of cinema, in the judgment of a case of fraud. We want to know the basis for these appointments.
Besides, we have problems with the administration regarding the upgradation of filmmaking technology used at FTII. A three-year-long course takes 4 years or more to complete because digitisation has not happened yet. Conversion of apparatus from analog to digital has been pending for many years now.
Q. You have been labelled anti-Hindu by the RSS.
A. Our Ideology has got nothing to do with our opposition to Gajendra Chauhan’s appointment. We have been labelled left-leaning hooligans, Naxals and Maoists even. Those with shallow ideas of Hinduism, of religion and ideology will question freedom, right to expression and free speech, and as defence they will give the dissenting party labels like these ones.
Q. What do you have to say about Prashant Pathrabe’s appointment as the new director of FTII?
A. That is an administrative appointment but we do not know him or his work yet and we will speak to him on Monday. However, since he has solid credentials we can wait to see his work and then comment.
Q. You have continued to strike even after ex-director D J Narain warned the students to call back the strike or face administrative action — including rustication.
A. In FTII, all decisions are taken democratically, after consulting all students involved. When this notice was put up, all the students who were agitating decided to continue the strike. The students collectively decided that even if one student was rusticated, all others would ask for the same. After all, we are fighting for a just cause.
Q. Doesn’t this strike affect students as well, as no classes have been held for over a month now?
A. The strike is now 37 days old, and this period has been one the most enriching experiences I had in FTII. It is not just a ‘morcha’ protest. We have learnt more during this strike than we would have learnt in a classroom. We are talking to people with varied perspectives about this issue, and interacting with people from different ideological backgrounds. Being so calculative (missing 37 days of classes) is a very regressive way of perceiving education. Learning does not happen in a classroom alone.
Q. You have said that Chauhan’s appointment is one of the many reasons for this strike. If his appointment is nullified, will you call back the strike?
A. It is not like we haven’t faced the other issues before we begun the strike and we are aware that they cannot be resolved in a day. This appointment will change the way FTII’s future policies shape up, so this is our top demand.
