When it comes to how things are defined, people tend to focus on absolute terms. If anything does not fit a clear point of view these days, it’s probably of no use. The best illustration can be seen in how age-old adages are used in the current context. There continues to be a degree of universal truth as well as acceptability in adages of yore.
As a result, they not only persist but also provide a template for how events happening in some parts of the world could well end up suggesting how things could play out in your backyard. On the face of it, there might not be any direct connection between the iconic proverb, “What Bengal thinks today, India thinks tomorrow”, and the power corridors of Hollywood, but a closer look suggests otherwise. Earlier this week, Ricky Gervais, stand-up comedian, actor, and host of this year’s Golden Globes called out Hollywood elites. In his eight-minute-long monologue, Gervais called A-List Hollywood friends of Jeffery Epstein, the late convicted sex offender arrested on charges of trafficking and accused of multiple charges including assaulting underage girls. He mocked the who’s who of Hollywood such as Tom Hanks, Meryl Streep, Leonardo DiCaprio, Martin Scorsese and many more for being self-important, phony woke and hypocritical.
A significant portion of mainstream media commented on how Gervais had cheapened the Golden Globes. Hosts such as Gervais are known to be unapologetically scathing, and to expect them to be contained is stupidity. Moreover, his approach also seems to work. After all, this was the fifth time that Gervais was hosting the Golden Globes. So, what was different this time? For one, individuals such as Gervais can no longer be contained by the system as they don’t need a traditional platform anymore. Gervais ridiculed everyone, only this time, he asked them to not use the platform to make political statements as none of them or the corporates behind them such as Apple, Disney or Amazon were in a position to lecture.
Hollywood nurtures outliers and rebels such as Gervais as it needs someone to question them to maintain the balance, but not beyond a point. In India, film awards have always been under a shadow of a doubt, more so in the last two decades. Instead of course correction, most awards started getting top stars to host the functions. The jokes became more personal, and even though nearly all of the humour was scripted, it made for good television nonetheless. This had been Hollywood’s response as well, and Bollywood did not reinvent the wheel. Post-Golden Globes 2020 it might change.
Imagine if Bollywood, Tamil, or Telugu film awards got a Gervais-like reality check?
The reason why the chances of something similar happening here are woefully less is this—media houses support most awards. In 1994, in the book News and the Culture of Lying: How Journalism Really Works, Paul H Weaver pointed out that media needed to find and cover stories of crisis and emergency response. In the last few decades, the rise of television might have heightened the demand for drama in the news, but this permanent emergency mode is not a new phenomenon. It was in the early 1880s when Joseph Pulitzer bought New York World, and made it the largest newspaper in the US at the onset of the 20th century. Today, the man on whose name the greatest award for any journalist, the Pulitzer Prize, was constituted is responsible for making news dramatic by adding catchy headlines, infusing emotion and sensationalism, and attaching a sense of immediacy. The next time someone throws an antiquated adage at you, do consider updating the nomenclature before brushing it away.
(Gautam Chintamani, Film historian and bestselling author can be contacted at gautam@chintamani.org)