Did Nepali community misinterpret Paatal Lok?




Warning: Spoilers ahead

 Faithful representation of reality without censoring and “putting raw things in reel setting to portray and ‘not embolden’ the discomfort in the society” through any visual art is what we understand as uncensored realism and cinematic symbolism. In India, we rarely get to watch such visual art, which uses the above art techniques to address the issues ailing our society. In less than a week of release, Amazon Prime’s new web-series Pataal Lok stood at par of utilizing such techniques in a very captivating manner, taking the audience to a new level of noir-fiction drama with its realistic portrayal of social filth, rooted in the soul of India. However, with so much popularity it gained, certain sections of the community are not happy with how the things are shown in the web-series.

A viral ten seconds clip from the series turned the table towards criticism, with thousands of posts and petitions being circulated on social media against the creators of the web-series. The protest is for a dialogue which allegedly is a racial slur made towards the Nepali community, profiling them in poor reputation. This happens in the second episode when during an interrogation in one of the police stations in Delhi, a female constable (played by Nikita Grover) slaps a transgender character Cheeni or Mary Lyngdoh (played by Mairembam Ronaldo Singh), an accused of an unattempted crime and swears her with a word “Nepali Whore” (in Hindi) just because the character has ‘Mongoloid’ feature. The dialogue used in the scene which is being widely circulated on social media has caused an uproar within a section of people along with political parties joining the protest. 

When I saw the clip, I was outraged and in no time, I shared it on my social media handles and joined my community members with demands such as “mute/delete the scene” and tagged everyone from the production team to seek a public apology for using such words, however, after an hour, I recalled one of my film appreciation classes. A long time ago, not over two years, one professor taught us about uncensored realism and cinematic symbolism in contemporary Indian cinema and said, “This technique will put you in discomfort as it highlights the reality of our social system.” Further with this, I recalled an interaction with noted filmmaker Adoor Gopalkrishnan back in my college and when asked about intriguing techniques used in cinema, he said, “...this might embolden if you watch a small clip but the entire narrative will be understood when the viewer watches the visual art thoroughly. Everyone’s perception of art is different, but the message consumed will be the same. We can look a scene through three unique ways and it of the audience, the critic and that of the creator.”

Keeping all these in my mind, I watched the series to understand the context in which they used such derogatory words. When the series ended with Inspector Haathi Ram Choudhary (played by Jaideep Ahlwat) throwing ice candy to the dog, my opinion towards the earlier discomfort changed. I understood where we lacked and what made us misinterpret such engrossing visual art. Throwing light on the cinematic techniques, Paatal Lok is a series, intertwined  with a very intriguing yet discomforting portrayal, lifts the underlying issue of Islamophobia, casteism, racism, violence against women, child sexual abuse, press freedom, transphobia and the corrupt system rooted in our social system.

This web-series offers us an insight on the struggles of people who we discriminate and pass judgements on a day-to-day basis, knowingly and unknowingly. I felt that it has a similar discourse used in Kamal Hasan’s enduring Tamil-hit Hey Ram, released two-decades ago. Scenes portrayed in the movie still validate in today’s setting; however, the entire symbolism is not emboldening either. If everything sets in with the cinematic technique, then what went wrong in Paatal Lok and why Nepali community is against it? Based on a small clip, how can we judge the entire web-series? 

Cannot accept racist slur in the name of creative freedom

Keeping the argument on perception and focussing on the Nepali audience, a certain section within the community is outraged with the usage of those two words. “Words which appear in the second episode are insulting to the entire Nepali community,” said the lawyer who served a legal notice to Anushka Sharma. One of the community members, who denied watching the entire series for projecting the community in negative lights, said, “These two words further reinstates the stereotyping of people from the Northeast”. 

“If they stereotype the community but still forget to show how a member of the community feels after the slur, we do not see any intention of them other than normalizing stereotype against the community,” opined another person. “Bollywood has called us with unique names and identities but this is a new low,” expressed another member on his social media. “It has hurt our sentiments by glorifying negativity and questioning on the dignity of our daughters, mothers and sisters,” writes a member. “For the sake of creative freedom, we should never consume such content, which is racist and xenophobic,” said another member of the community.

If we go by the logic, it will anger any member of the community when the community is projected with such negativity. For a community which has been a victim of racial profiling through visual art in the past, scenes like this further inflict a pain. Now, the community members have served a legal notice to the producer and want them to mute/delete the scene, blur the subtitle with an unconditional public apology. It will be interesting to see how things will take a turn. 

The mere portrayal of the underlying issue, but words could have been crafted politically

However, commentators posit that it justifies the dialogue in the scene to an extent, but the word could have been different, if there was a choice. They say that the web-series is trying to portray the darker side of the Indian system. A noted film critic observes that the creators should not have used such politically incorrect words, which further crystallize the existing poor reputation of the community. However, a commentator points out that this web-series through many hate elements shown is a work of fiction which lifts the stereotypes and does not encourage the audience to bring hate into play. 

One Bengaluru-based writer in an opinion piece argues that, “even if you intended to uplift and raise social awareness about a vulnerable minority, you should have used carefully crafted politically correct words. We [Nepali community] have been abused and labelled with so many nicknames, that every negative portrayal hurts us, demeans us and gets us terrified.” A certain section of scholars focuses on how negative branding creates a problem and the usage of such catchphrases. “we recall a brand with its taglines and catchphrases, making it easier to remember,” admits one scholar. 

The user who first reported about the scene through his Instagram, said, “All of my past fears re-emerged because those two words were like a demeaning catchphrase, which recapitulated what our females were already accused of and frequently branded as. Anyone who has experienced bullies and unpleasant nicknames can understand — catchphrases are much ‘catchier’ and sink deeper than the underlying context in which it is expressed. That’s the reason all the people who shared concern, speak one point - such targeted generalisation was not needed.” However, a commentator centres her argument towards the politically motivated propaganda being carried out by a certain political column against the creators of the web-series and said, “Visual arts should be watched open-ended. Why people are mobilizing themselves based on one small clipping? Why spreading propaganda and confuse the general Nepali population who don’t even have access to Amazon Prime to understand the reality. Such outrage is because of politically motivated propaganda, and this concern me. It roots everything in mob mentality and not inquisitive to know the in-depth.”


Reality check on the subaltern issues, not inciting

We cannot conclude this debate without breaking down on the creators’ point-of-view and the demand of the script. The previous argument on perception in a visual art through uncensored realism and cinematic symbolism comes into the course to justify on their side. I reached out to my close friend who is involved in making short films in Bengaluru circuit and started with an example of Thappad, an Indian drama which questions the complicity of women who make compromises. He asserts, “Thappad is a movie which revolves around a legal battle by the protagonist against her husband for one slap. The slap in the movie does not encourage any husband to slap his wife. It is a mere portrayal of the issue happening for real.” He further adds on to say that words used in any visual art can be perceived in two ways. First is the usage of derogatory words towards the community with a derogatory belief or the second is pointing out the social filth with reasoning such as why this should not be a desirable form of communication. 

He points out, “If you binge-watch Paatal Lok and try to analyse the words used in the second episode, you understand that it has nothing to do with projecting the Nepali community in negative lights. There is nothing wrong in the script as it is only trying to break on the stereotypes this community faces in reality. I base the entire series on underlying subaltern issues through breaking down on the stereotypes. Nothing is encouraging.”

In the series, throughout the nine episodes, the story carries forward with breaking down on the reality of the social system in India. As the story unfolds further deeply by an Inspector (Haathi Ram) trying to find out the past of the four accused of an unattempted assassination of left-liberal journalist Sanjeev Mehra (played by Neeraj Kabi), it brings out the layer of social stigma which every character in the web-series has been a victim of!

For example, the lynching of Kabir M’s brother by right-wing activists in a railway station after a co-passenger mistook it to be beef. The scene is highlighting instigating mob-lynching towards a certain community for the choice of their food. Or, the way the last name of sub-inspector Imran Ansari (played by Ishwak Singh) follows him throughout the series, getting him profiled for being a Muslim. Or how Kabir M gets killed because of the confusion arises with his last name.  Or, how Cheeni in her childhood gets raped by a ‘beggar mafia’, the scene is not encouraging child sexual abuse but is a portrayal of such evil treatment happening with children. Or how Tope Singh’s mother gets raped by an upper-caste and how his family faces severe consequences when he killed three upper-caste bullies. Or how Sanjeev Mehra faces political force for his editorial independence. Or the vandalism faced by the Chitrakoot-based crime reporter for his reportage on a big-fat politician. Each scene is an honest attempt by the writer to bring in the underlying stereotype happening with everyone in India, intertwined in the web of hate, crime and violence.

On the other hand, claiming that it has projected the Nepali community in unpleasant light without understanding the whole context is where we lack the understanding of what is a reality and it makes a mob mentality. These things shown in the web-series is just another day in our lives. The symbolism used throughout the web-series is a portrayal and “not encouragement”, pointing towards the discrimination happening for real in the “other India”, different from what we see and what we hear. If one adds every element together, we get to see visual art, grabbing the attention of everyone, comprehensive of classic cinematic techniques. Every scene, every word, every dialogue used in the script offers us sensitization of such day-to-day discrimination. 

“The usage of the word by the lady constable is never trying to be promoting or putting the community in an unpleasant light but it a portrayal of what already exists. In the community's case, it is how the women are subjected to be accused of and how they are branded. Don’t we carry this tag around us in the mainland?” observes a media practitioner. She further tries to add on how the series is a striking reality and trying to point out the discriminations happening with everyone based on what they look like, eat, wear walk, talks, etc. “What more harmful is the mobilisation towards the negativity by just watching a small clip and not considering the big picture on what the series wants to convey. One cannot jump into a conclusion based on the fact of one small clipping,” she added.  

The protest by a small section of the community on the dialogue grabbed from a minor scene, without trying to look into the whole context will further fuels confusion amongst the general population. The general population who do not have access to the OTT platform will argue based on what is being viral on social media. This small section within the community could have sensitised the general population on the reality instead of spreading confusion by sharing the ten-seconds clipping. “These people [core protestors] know the reality. They know the enormous picture but will still protest because it will be the best moment for them to gain political support through their baseless argument. With this act, they are inciting hate towards the creators and this is what the web-series is all about. Do they care for women or it is just another drama for their political gains and national headlines?” she claims. 

However, differing from the protests, I hold this view that this crime thriller is an attempt to highlight the stereotypical mindsets through a very intriguing odd of the socio-political filth ingrained in our system, in our everyday life and emphasising on how the reality works. 

The answer lies on consumption of art

After understanding all the three sides of the argument, two questions comes in the mind and they are: Was it defaming or was trying to point out the “other side” of India which we do not give any attention to because we have never been subjected to it? Whatever remains here is the criticism on the series; the argument based on cinematic techniques and what the actual truth is. Now let’s get back to what Gopalkrishnan said, “Understand the context and the enormous picture” so what does he mean? Was he trying to say that negative mobilisation is harmful based on one scene? The answer to it remains how the content is being consumed. If every visual art has to release a clarification in parallel to every scene or dialogue used, we will reach to a certain point when there won’t be any art form; forget about realism and symbolism.

But again, when viewed through a community’s perspective, a certain thing does not set-up right and feels that the “freedom of expression” is being abused by the creators, subjecting the community in bad lights. Besides, the commentators feel that words could have been better politically crafted. But what we miss out at large is the demand of the script and the creators’ perspective. If we miss out on the symbolism used throughout the series, the creators are at the loss because their audience failed to understand them. The question lies about how visual art are being viewed and how they are consumed? With so much criticism gained by the Paatal Lok team not just from Nepali community but from other sections as well on the portrayal of various scenes and dialogues used, it seems the message of the web-series didn’t reach them. 

The entire argument lies on the grounds of content consumption. Let’s get back to the issue and understand why there is a mass opposition to the web-series? With so much clarification on the dialogue being put on the social media, does it still put Paatal Lok team at fault? Is it a politically motivated propaganda of one section of people against the creators? Does it make an argument that the audience is not ready yet ready to understand the uncensored realism and cinematic symbolism? Is the usage of the two words has put Nepali community in poor reputation? Everything lies in how we perceive the art!

Comments