ಡಬ್ಬಿ೦ಗ್ : ಹಾಗೊ೦ದು… ಹೀಗೊ೦ದು ಲೇಖನಕ್ಕೆ ಮು೦ದುವರೆದು ಸಾಹಿಲ್ ತಮ್ಮ ಪ್ರತಿಕ್ರಿಯೆಯನ್ನು ಬರೆದಿದ್ದರು. ಅದಕ್ಕೆ ಅಶೋಕ್ ಶೆಟ್ಟರ್ ಸ್ಪ೦ದಿಸಿದ್ದು ಹೀಗೆ….

– ಅಶೋಕ್ ಶೆಟ್ಟರ್

When an issue is approached cynically chances are that it is approached selectively. Not surprisingly Samvartha is more disturbed by the modalities of presentation of the content in SJ than the content itself. Interestingly the whole issue is sought to be placed in the context of market forces and profit-mongering, which tenor of course was set by our friend B.Suresh in quite a few of his own and others’ threads on facebook which he has now developed into an article to which Samvartha has responded. It is not to deny that there are, inevitably, these dimensions to SJ nor is it to suggest that they are insignificant. But what is disappointing is the reluctance to reckon that there could be impacts and implications of a different nature, a little positive in an otherwise pathetic milieu where minds seem to have become desensitized to even the most sensitive issues. Unless one views social change as something very dramatic, there is no reason why one shouldn’t view efforts like these as building blocks of a collective consciousnes, the exact build up and potential of which is hard to measure.. As far as I can see the reluctance is the result of imposing on or expecting from the poor Amir Khan a role of demolishing the larger villainous structure of exploitative institutions of India, a role which Amir khan hasn’t claimed he is taking upon himself. While sharing Samvartha’s discomfort at the thought that we require some ‘aura’ like Amir khan’s to awaken our consciousness and make us see the reality of our times and while agreeing with him that this is a sort of moral illness of ours which needs to be cured, I fail to see why it should lead one to reduce the perception to the expectation of some socialist realism kind of stuff from him and employ it to belittle a reasonably good team work comparing it with the models of works of Sainath et al,   Samvartha Sahil knows that the discussion on the issue started in Karnataka at different levels of public debate even before the first episode of SJ was telecast when it was not even known what the content of the programme precisely would be. It resulted from the pressurized stalling of the telecast of dubbed Kannada version of SJ which a channel had undertaken to telecast. The channel made it available on the net to facilitate its viewing by those interested. When its viewership increased ‘alarmingly’ some invisible forces of the same “Framework of Commerce” in Karnataka stalled that too. This despite an unmistakable opinion in favour of the need for it’s being telecast in dubbed Kannada version in an opinion poll which the channel itself had conducted. As a result the debate started within the framework of the larger framework of the principles of a democratic society which I’m sure is as much dear to Samvartha as it is to most of us. Surprisingly he has nothing to say about it. And that is unfortunate. Samvartha should preferably have done that too with the enthusiasm with which he set up the terms of an AgniPariksha for Amir Khan predicting what would happen to him and his SJ if he presented on ‘realities’ of centrifugal codes of identities like caste,religion,communalism and such other domains of exploitation or discrimination.. Well we don’t know what is in store in forthcoming episodes. What we know for sure is that there is no dearth in the history of India for those who offered the most appealing and effective critique of the discriminations based on castes and sects and the evils still persist. If Amir Khan presents some issues which are also important and which are such that they can be viewed as problems of a larger nature in contemporary Indian society, cutting across the ever present centrifugal categories within India, why not welcome it. I rather see no reason as to why his effort can’t be viewed as complementary to activism.   I don’t call myself a born cynic like samvartha does simply because I am not sure if someone is a born something apart from being a child. Otherwise I too have cynical and skeptical attributes to my thinking in equal measure if not more and if I am also sounding selective in my approach it is in the nature of things.  ]]>