The article examines the importance of art and the reasons why it, more than anything else, needs to be protected from the culture of censorship. There will undoubtedly be variances in people’s opinions regarding whether or not a particular work of art is appropriate for public display because art is totally subjective and susceptible to interpretation. We will have to stop producing art as soon as we start outlawing certain pieces of art because someone, somewhere, finds them objectionable.
Throughout its brief history, the Pakistani censor board has managed to ban many films that it felt “did not align with Pakistan’s true moral values.” Sabiha Sumar’s “Khamosh Pani,” Sarmad Khoosat’s “Zindagi Tamasha,” and, more recently, Saim Sadiq’s “Joyland” all faced public backlash and government bans. One may ask, “What is common to all these movies that manages to offend certain people so much that they would have the government completely ban these movies from screening?” The answer is simple: these movies usually happen to target issue areas that we as a society have been programmed not to see as issue areas. We are so sentimentally attached to our personal ideas of “normal,” of “good” and “bad” that when a movie, a mere work of art, shows us explicitly what is wrong, we are offended and lash out.
At the same time, many dramas and movies portraying abuse, promoting patriarchy, and depicting the same old whining, helpless woman continue to garner high ratings and accolades. The same logic holds here: we have been wired to see these things as normal and acceptable, and hence, a drama or movie, say one that romanticises a toxic relationship with an emotionally unstable male (I am sure you can all think of at least one famous drama reading that line), is less problematic to us than Sharmeen Obaid’s documentary on acid attacks in the country because it “ruins the image of Pakistan.” So, while I recognise that certain movies and dramas can be problematic, under no circumstance should these be banned, regardless of how “horrible” or “dangerous” the content is.
Let me also say this: art is subjective and completely open to interpretation, so you and I are bound to differ on what is safe enough to be shown on television. Once we start banning art because someone somewhere is offended, then we will have to get rid of art all together. If I do not like anything, I would rather go and tell people why I do not like it and what should be the “alternative” than whine on social media about why something that “I” do not like is “bad” and thus should be banned. George Bernard Shaw was right when he said, “Without art, the crudeness of reality would make the world unbearable.” I personally think it is the lack of art that has driven us so miserable, but more on that later.
I have to cite a recent and very good example of the subjectivity of art—how the same art is viewed differently by different people. A few days ago, a music video for the song “Sukoon” by Hassan and Roshaan was released on YouTube. When I viewed the music video, it was already trending, and like many other aesthetes, all I could see was vibrant colors, melodious voices, and beautiful music. Before I knew it, people had started bashing the artists on Twitter because they said, and I quote, the music video promotes homosexuality. I was utterly confused, yet respectful of this interpretation because, at the end of the day, it is art, and if someone wants to interpret it that way, they are free to do so. I then asked one of the Twitter users to clarify, and there it was: a few seconds of a snippet from the music video where two women are looking at each other. While the main artist responsible for the video’s visuals confirmed that one of the two women represented a goldfish, detractors insisted that the video is “propaganda” (a word so overused!) and should be banned. Need I say more?
The culture of movie bans reveals a lot about our society. People are relieved of their obligation to assume personal accountability. The banning of films is a tactic used by those in power to suggest that the public lacks discernment, is incapable of self-control while viewing a film, and is immature to handle the themes being depicted. Besides showing that we are intolerant, ignorant, and unaccommodating, the ban culture, more than anything else, shows that we are all some sort of cattle that need to be goaded to stay on the right track. Banning a film so that others cannot see it makes it evident that those in power do not trust that the public can think for themselves and determine whether a film is an enjoyable work of fiction or a serious attack on their culture, values, religion, and other perspectives regarding life in general.
People’s perspectives can change when they are given the freedom to choose what they find interesting and even to revel in such things, which helps them understand that art is not always intended to be offensive. Instead, it aims to extend one’s perspectives and present many points of view, even if they are not always collectively agreeable. The ability to choose to broaden your worldview, even from an imagined perspective, is important because it creates a desire to learn, to know as much as possible about why a movie went a certain direction and why it might be culturally relevant, so having more options in terms of what to watch and enjoy in terms of cinema is fantastic.
Ultimately, prohibiting movies or any other form of art is a horrible idea because it tries to prevent people from knowing what motivated such a production rather than encouraging a search for answers. The right to life is meaningless if we are not allowed to express ourselves freely. It is more personal speech, more freedom, and true wisdom to respond to forms of expression with which we disagree. We cannot just ban ideas that we do not agree with because, whether we like it or not, choices are personal and every human was born free. Choosing what to watch should be a decision that an individual can make for himself. Similar to how it is not the state’s duty to make us better citizens, it is not the cinema’s responsibility to safeguard our emotions either. We have a right to make our own choices, but not to be cowed by our standards for what is appropriate to watch and what is not. Forbidding individuals from discussing, observing, or learning about what goes on in society is not going to make the world a better place, just like the pigeon closing its eyes does not actually make the cat disappear. Respecting each other’s freedoms, forms of freedom, and expressions of freedom despite differences is what is certainly going to make the world a better place. And remember: if a film, or any form of art for that matter, “hurts” your feelings, it has accomplished exactly what it set out to do.
