[Reader-list] NEWS FROM VIKALP: DAY 3

[by way of Monica Narula]

CAMPAIGN AGAINST CENSORSHIP

Dear Friends,

Please find below the following:

- NEWS FROM THE THIRD DAY AT VIKALP

- THE FIRST ISSUE OF VIKALP VICHAAR : A FOUR PAGE FESTIVAL BULLETIN

- A DRAFT OF THE OPEN LETTER TO THE MINISTER (I&B) TO BE DISTRIBUTED
AT VIKALP AND MIFF

NEWS FROM VIKALP: DAY 3

On the third day of the Vikalp: Films for Freedom festival, the
ongoing protest against censorship recorded more than 2000 registered
delegates. As in the previous days, screenings were followed by
lively discussions centered around the films and the issues they
raise, as well as the art of documentary filmmaking.

But the main news of the day came from across the street, at the
controversy ridden Mumbai International Film Festival (MIFF).
Filmmakers from the Campaign Against Censorship attended the Press
Conference organised by MIFF to present the Selection Committee's
version of the controversy surrounding the selection process. The
meeting took a revealing turn when Mr K Bikram Singh, Member,
National Selection Committee began an argument with Mr Babu
Ramaswamy, Co-ordinator MIFF about the legitimacy of removing a film
that has been recommended by their panel.

Media representatives and filmmakers witnessed a startling revelation
by Mr. K.Bikram Singh: "We were not a selection committee, but only a
recommending authority." He added that the committee neither had a
chairperson, nor were they briefed about the number of films or
screening hours; there was no single member who saw all the entries
and hence, the committee was not aware of how the final list was
compiled.

Mr. Babu Ramaswamy, Co-ordinator MIFF however, chose to disagree and
claimed that the members were adequately briefed and that there was
no interference in their functioning. In response to a specific
question about the film-Words on Water, he admitted that although it
had been selected by the committee for the international competition
section, the ex-director of MIFF had excluded this film.
Mr.Ramasawamy defended this act of censorship as "fine tuning" and
claimed that the festival director was only exercising the
prerogative of his office. Mr. Bikram Singh chose to differ on this,
and said that the Director of MIFF had no right to exclude films
selected by the committee, and what was done in MIFF 2004 was
unprecedented and unfair.

The inconsistent and contradictory remarks on the selection process
by the various actors involved firmly corroborate the contention of
the CAC that the selection process was fundamentally flawed and
involved backdoor censorship. This view was also expressed strongly
by a wide spectrum of those present, ranging from IDPA
representatives, organizing committee members, past selection and
jury members, and representatives of the media. In the words of Mr.
RV Ramani, organizing committee member, who resigned in protest
against the flawed selection process: "This is not a selection
committee but a farce!"  He was amongst several others who demanded
an urgent review of the entire selection process of MIFF 2004.

ANNOUNCEMENT:

Vikalp- Films for Freedom also announced a panel discussion titled:
RESISTING CENSORSHIP. Scheduled for Feb 8th, 2004, the participants
include Arundhati Roy, writer, Nikhil Wagle, Editor ?Mahanagar?, and
Anand Patwardhan, filmmaker. The venue will be the Bhupesh Gupta
Bhavan (3rd floor)  89 Sayani Road, Prabhadevi at 12:30 pm

vikalp vichaar- The festival bulletin:

Interview with Sanjay Kak

Q. How did the Campaign Against Censorship (CAC) begin?

Sanjay: The CAC has emerged as an action platform of over 275
documentary filmmakers from all over India. It was triggered off when
MIFF introduced a dangerously discriminatory clause asking for Indian
entries for the festival to submit censor certificates. In a matter
of a few short weeks, more than 200 filmmakers had grouped together
to express their outrage, and filmmakers from the world over joined
in.

But beyond the MIFF issue, the Campaign represents a spontaneous
release of energy from the growing and vibrant documentary filmmaking
community in India.

  Q. Though MIFF was forced to withdraw the censorship clause, the
subsequent selection process sidelined most films that were remotely
?political? or critical of the establishment. Was Vikalp a reaction
to this deliberate sidelining of alternative voices?

Sanjay: Vikalp is not simply a reaction. MIFF is a small irritant
around which a lot of mobilization has materialized. There are 30
rejected filmmakers with a wide range of subjects. Normally we don?t
even show our films in the same places, but there?s enough common
ground. Vikalp is a platform of people with shared concerns, a broad
area of common understanding. It is provoked no doubt by what
happened ? the censorship clause, etc. - but it is important to
recognize the moment. Something like this would not have been
possible even 10 years ago, simply because there were not enough
people in documentary filmmaking then. But the development in
production, in technology, and its impact on filmmaking practice, the
growing self confident community of filmmakers, not just in cities
like Delhi and Bombay, but in small towns all over the country, not
to forget, the growing audience - all these have contributed to
creating an envi! ronment where a protest like this is possible. But
i f we recognize this flexibility, this proliferation of production
and the audience, so does the sarkar. The state is taking note of it,
is cracking down on newspapers, magazines and television channels
that are critical of the establishment, so much so that even a
magazine like The Outlook has been brought to heel. Today any large
monolithic media structure is vulnerable. But we documentary
filmmakers, to quote Arundhati Roy, are like machchars (mosquitoes)
on the back of a big buffalo - how are they going to stop us?

  Q. There?s been some talk of taking this package to different
educational institutes, of turning it into a traveling festival like
Film South Asia.

Sanjay: Yes, we could take the package to different institutes, or we
could ask them to choose specific films that they would like to
screen. The important thing is to preserve the independent character
of the festival, to prevent it from becoming dependent on the State
or on any one funding organisation. Because when that happens, you
become vulnerable to pressure. So forming another IDPA or MIFF is
useless. The trick is to let the big festivals be - MIFF can be
revamped, cleaned up - but this impulse, this alternative space
should not be tampered with. For every large institution, there must
be a counter institution. I firmly believe that this kind of
amorphous, loose, spirited and engaged mode of working, this attempt
at a kind of democracy and transparency is very essential. We have
proved that we can do it in 20 days. If we get 6 months, we can come
up with something truly fantastic.

VIKALP AS VIKALP

Vikalp is alternative. It is a new! possibility. It is not just a
festival that is staged as a protest to the MIFF. It is a movement of
filmmakers. It is a collective that has the ability to provide new
directions to the independent film making community (documentary &
short) in India . The formation of this collective can play a crucial
role in making independent Indian films accessible to all, and
provide a platform for filmmakers. In the recent years the
digitalization of filmmaking practice has made it a democratic
medium. This has led a to substantial leap in the number of films
being made in the country. Most of these are independently produced
without funding from the state, TV channels or production houses.
More and more individual filmmakers are going out and making films.
Vikalp can intervene in this area by providing a platform for all
Indians independent filmmakers to exhibit their work not just in
Indi! a but the world over. Some initial ideas:

--- Package of some of the films shown in this festival should travel
across the country. This should be done on a non-profit basis.

--- The same package should be publicized through the Internet and
made available to universities and community groups all over the
world, especially in the US and the UK. This has tremendous potential
and can be done on a profit basis, so that we can cross-subsidize the
distribution of films in India.

--- A financially viable distributive mechanism should be formed,
which allows filmmakers to sell their films in India and all over the
world. Given the deep penetrative power of the Internet this can be
made possible even with meager resources.

  Some long-term possibilities:

--- To build an archive of independent films. If the state is not
keen to show our films, obviously it will not be interested in
archiving them. So there is a need to have an independent archive to
preserve these films for the future.

--- To set up multiple permanent spaces for exhibiting independent
films all over the country. This can be a unique platform for a
deeper interaction between audiences and filmmakers, and amongst
filmmakers themselves=2E

--- To set up permanent production and post ? production facilities
for filmmakers who don?t have access to equipment. These can be made
available on a non-profit basis.

These are not new ideas, and neither are they impossible. Filmmakers?
collectives like Vikalp exist all over the world, and they not only
exhibit films and distribute them, but also provide a space for the
production and archiving of films. Let us collate the energies that
have emerged together in the making of Vikalp and keep the momentum
on to have a larger impact of Indian independent filmmaking on the
world.

RESPONSES TO VIKALP

It is tremendous to see this kind of a shared community of filmmakers
here. It is on this strength that they can stand against resistance.
This is really empowering, and this kind of thing is not there where
I come from. This festival is all about claiming space and I feel
that such efforts are important as I feel that this is the last
bastion of independent cinema in South Asia. ---- Yasmeen Kabir,
Director: A Certain Liberation (International Competition, MIFF).
Yasmeen is from Bangladesh.

  The success of Vikalp goes to show that these things can work. And I
wish many more filmmakers had supported this cause, for censorship is
not restricted to this medium alone. Vikalp is not a rebel child that
is trying to make a lot of noise.--- Chitra Palekar, Filmmaker

As a protest, it is remarkable that we have in such a short time put
together a festival that parallels MIFF, though I was wondering if
filmmakers who have withdrawn would rather have stayed within MIFF
and spoken about censorship there. The films could have been screened
in both venues. - Rajula Shah, Filmmaker

  Fantastic response. More than anything it is the beginning of a film
movement. - Pooja Kaul, Director: Rasikan Re (International
Competition Selection, MIFF)

  I have been coming to MIFF for the last decade and all that I have
learnt about documentary filmmaking is from MIFF. It is sad to
showcase my film in this moth-ridden festival. Vikalp is a wake up
call for MIFF. If they respond to it they will survive otherwise they
will be a part of history. I wish all success to Vikalp. Supriyo Sen
(Director : Way Back Home; International Competition) publicly
announced his solidarity with Vikalp while introducing his film at
MIFF yesterday.

  The atmosphere at Vikalp is informal and very relaxed. The very fact
that one can lie down and watch films is a luxury not seen in any
other festival. You don?t have to be anything other than reverent to
each other?s work. It?s fantastic that there?s only one screening at
a time and not multiple screenings because films are not commodities
to be chosen.  - Gurvinder Singh, Director: Pala.

  It is wonderful that filmmakers have come together ? to dialogue,
and to show their work. Also, the festival is non-competitive, and
that?s a good thing because we are not pitting one film against
another. This package should move to other cities. I would personally
want to host this package at Nasik  .- Nitin Paranjape, Abhivyakti,
Nashik

I want to make Bhupesh Gupta Bhavan a sustainable cultural center.
Vikalp has opened up possibilities for more such festivals in the
future and I think it should be an annual event.  - Balchandra Kango,
Editor: Yugantar.

  No smoking !

No spitting !

No censorship !!

>From Vikalp team.



Draft of open Letter to the Minister for Information & Broadcasting:
To be distributed at vikalp and miff

  February 7, 2003

  From:

Campaign Against Censorship

  To:

Shri Ravi Shankar Prasad

Minister for Information & Broadcasting

Shastri Bhawan

New Delhi

  Dear Shri Prasad,

  The Campaign Against Censorship (CAC) is an action platform of over
275 documentary filmmakers from different parts of India, who have
come together in response to the increasing use of censorship to
silence filmmakers. The most recent and glaring instance of this is
the controversy surrounding the Mumbai International Film Festival
(MIFF), where both overt censorship (through an initial attempt to
introduce a censorship clause for Indian entries to the festival) and
subsequently covertly (by a biased selection procedure completely
lacking in transparency and accountability)



A month ago the CAC requested you to intervene in the crisis
surrounding MIFF and censorship. You chose to remain silent, and this
silence of the Ministry of Information & Broadcasting has today cost
it dear. Each day of the festival, the controversy ridden MIFF has
been widely exposed by the newspapers and TV channels, who have
reported the ways in which MIFF has failed documentary filmmakers.



You would also be aware that Shri Girish Karnad, one of the senior
most members on the jury panel, decided to resign rather than be
associated with a questionable selection procedure. His letter is a
clear indictment of the entire process followed at MIFF and also
expresses surprise that the widespread outrage at the selections made
could not have been foreseen by the organisers of the festival. This
was followed by the resignation of Shri RV Ramani, a member of the
Organising Committee of MIFF. Finally, 13 filmmakers have withdrawn
their films from MIFF in protest against the flawed selection
process. Films Division, the organisers of Miff, is a divided house
today. We have been receiving a barrage of requests from within the
organisation to intervene and save MIFF.



We reiterate that MIFF is a valuable space for the documentary
fraternity in this country and our effort for the last six months has
been to save MIFF from becoming an international embarrassment. You
would recall that it was only after we called for an international
boycott of the festival that MIFF withdrew the demand for a censor
certificate from Indian filmmakers. We could have once again called
for a boycott of the festival and brought it to a grinding halt but
chose not to. We want to save the festival from attempts to chip away
at its credibility over the years.



MIFF can still be saved from further rot but for this there has to be
a genuine and serious effort to collectively address the problems.
The festival is run with public funds and is answerable to the
documentary fraternity, which currently stands completely alienated
from the organisers of the festival.



It is time for its organisers to reflect upon what the world is
already saying - MIFF requires a review, and an overhaul.



A festival without a permanent director, complete lack of
transparency, no effort at curation, and rife with mismanagement and
bungling, does not make a quality international film festival. In
order to win back the confidence of the filmmakers it needs to regain
the active participation of the documentary fraternity. An
independent review of the festival by a group of committed
filmmakers, along with proven individuals that have experience of
running professional festivals is imperative. At present MIFF is
simply going through the motions of holding a festival because it has
the mandate to do so. And therefore as is only to be expected, with
no imagination, energy or serious engagement with the art of
documentary film making.



The following steps could save MIFF :

·    An independent review committee to be constituted in consultation with CAC

·    This review committee should help select an independent director
for the festival with a small permanent team.

·    The festival must ensure a transparent selection process by a
team of well-known filmmakers, critics, film academics and curators.

·    A genuine attempt at building a partnership with the independent
documentary movement.



For all this to become a reality a dialogue needs to be initiated
with the film making community. Organisers of MIFF are welcome to
visit "Vikalp - Films for Freedom", a space that is alive with
filmmakers, students, and activists, with packed screenings and
lively discussions. The films are being screened at the Lokvangmaya
Griha with support from Agarkar Vichar Vyaspeeth. The visit could be
highly educative on how to organise a film festival that is truly a
celebration of documentary filmmaking.



All this was done in less than three weeks, on a budget that is less
than 1% of what the Ministry spends on MIFF. We are willing to help
MIFF to emerge out of its present crisis as a better festival.



But is anybody listening?



With best wishes



For Campaign Against Censorship