Social media websites in Afghanistan have become portals of heated discussions and disputes about short scenes of a new Indian film entitled “Panipat”. The film is about Ahmad Shah Abdali, one of the kings of Afghanistan who fought in India. The film, with special effects and dialogues about Afghan attacks on India, has triggered widespread reactions about the Indian narrative of events as they unfolded.
The film has not been released yet, but some of its scenes published on social media websites have amassed a large number of fans. Although the film has its critics in India, its supporters and critics are divided into two particular groups in Afghanistan. Both groups present their views and critique of Abdali’s personality from their points of view. Criticism of the film in Afghanistan is so strong that those who agree with the film are subjected to profanity. Some social media users have said on their accounts that the government of Afghanistan must react to this matter. Some go to the extent to argue that the script of the film should have been shared with the government of Afghanistan, something which has become more of a joke on social media websites.
Panipat is an upcoming historical war film directed by Ashutosh Gowarikar based on the third battle of Panipat with Arjun Kapoor, Sanjay Dutt and Kriti Sanon in the cast scheduled for release on December 6. There are perceptions that the movie has insulted Ahmad Shah Abdali, prompting sharp reactions from many Afghan citizens. (Chaudhury, 2019) Fearing misrepresentation of former Afghan emperor Ahmad Shah Abdali in Ashutosh Gowarikar’s upcoming Bollywood period drama Panipat, the Embassy of Afghanistan has expressed concerns to New Delhi and sought a meeting with Information and Broadcasting Minister Prakash Javadekar over the issue.
Starring actors Sanjay Dutt and Arjun Kapoor, Panipat is based on the Third Battle of Panipat between the Maratha Empire and the Durrani Empire in 1761 — one of the most significant events in Indian history. The film’s trailer was released recently, sparking concerns amid Afghan people about the misrepresentation of Abdali (played by Dutt), the founder of modern Afghanistan, as a brutal ruler. Within hours of the trailer release, the Afghanistan Embassy in New Delhi wrote to the Ministry of External Affairs. (DUTTA, 2019)
“Since the film is related to former Afghan emperor Ahmad Shah Abdali, any insensitive/distorted depiction of his character might provoke emotions of Afghans which could be unfairly exploited by others to adversely affect the trust and harmony that exists so well among the people of two countries,” the letter stated.
The trailer of Panipat has garnered over 35 million views on YouTube since its release and is still trending on the platform. Many voices from Afghanistan have since spoken up against what they feel could be a misrepresentation of the Durrani emperor and Ahmad Shah Abdali, a revered figure for them.
Varied reactions to the trailer of Panipat brings me to discuss cultural theorist and political activist Stuart Hall's theory of communication through media, which he emphasizes his encoding and decoding model in media. This theory suggests that the media carries important messages, which producers "encode" in text. However, audiences come to their interpretations when they "decode" a text through the process of negotiation. He further proposed that audiences come to different understandings of a text depending on the reception context in which they saw it.
According to Stuart Halls encoding and decoding model, both the producer and the audience have very specific roles within this model. Producers, people who create a form of media that is based on their ideas or ideologies are known as the encoders. And the audience, viewers of the media that is produced are known as the decoders. In the process of encoding a message, the sender may use either verbal (words, signs, images) or non-verbal (body language, facial expressions) symbols to help the receiver better comprehend the message that is given. As the message is in the possession of the receiver, the audience takes and observes the message into an interpretation and translation process, where the coded information is decoded and translated into a comprehensible form. This process allows the opportunity for the receiver to reconstruct the idea by giving meanings to symbols and to interpret the message as a whole. However, the receiver of the sender's message won’t always get the expected response the producer was expecting.
Stuart Hall urges that there are three main positions that the audiences might take when they decode the media message. Such as dominant-hegemonic or preferred, negotiated and oppositional.
The first type of decoding is the dominated response. In this type of response, the audience or receiver fully accepts and reproduces the code to the producer or sender.
A preferred reading occurs when a decoder operating within the dominant code decodes a message in terms of the codes with which it has been encoded. This, according to Hall, is the hypothetical instance of "perfectly transparent communication". Such a characterization has allowed the possibility of transparent communication being read into the mode. (Pillai, 1992)
For example, there are dominated decoders among individuals who reacted to the trailer of the Panipat. "Why are you throwing your life away for such a small piece of land," Abdali asks Sadashiv in the trailer, and he answers even more dramatically (or at least as dramatically as Arjun Kapoor’s acting will allow him): "I am ready to die for even a single grain of dust of my motherland". (Gowarikar, 2019) The producer's intention by this dramatic dialogue is vivid, it wanted to show Marathas patriotism. The intended response is dominated because the producer, Ashutosh Gowarikar, made it his main intention to create a sense of patriotism. A large number of viewers have got what the producer wanted them to understand through the trailer. Stuart Hall has themed them as "dominant-hegemonic or preferred readers".
As a viewer, Santosh Shinde, commented under the official trailer of Panipat, saying "one of the reasons why Panipat keep you hooked is because of the director's depiction of the complex politics behind a battle". Another one has said that "the best thing about this movie is storytelling and it keeps you engaged. Once again it has been proved that the director is the real hero to make a great cinema". (Gowarikar, 2019)
The second type of decoding is the negotiated response. To emphasize the notion of no necessary correspondence between encoding and decoding, Hall (1980a) also distinguishes between "negotiated" and "oppositional" readings. A negotiated reading occurs when in spite of recognizing the authenticity of hegemonic definitions the viewer contests them through particular or "situated" logics. (Pillai, 1992)
It means, this type of response partly believes the code and broadly accepts the message, but the receiver sometimes modifies the message that best reflects their own experiences, interests and positions. We can discover "negotiated readings" in the short trailer of Panipat film. This part of viewers accepts the history of Panipat war and some aspects of the short trailer as well. But the distorted depiction of former Afghan emperor Ahmad Shah Abdali's character provokes their emotions.
The negotiated audiences in Afghanistan are not keen to see the brave Marathas, led by the Peshwa's cousin Sadashiv Rao Bhau, being brutally destroyed by Abdali, who invaded India nine times between 1747 and 1769. The trailer shows an emperor, clearly, Shah Alam II, convinced that no one would dare go against the Marathas. Until a Mughal courtier says: “Ek hai, Jahapanah”. It also shows another Muslim ruler handing over his guns to Abdali. “Ham Maratha ka safaya kar denge. (We will remove all evidence of Marathas from here),” to which the Muslim ally, either from the Rohillas or Awadh, says: “Phir hamari bandookein aapki (Then our guns are yours)”. (DUTTA, 2019)
The film is intended to shed light on the history of Panipat war where the viewers can exercise the producers intended message but because of the portrayal of Ahmad Shah Abdali in the film, they will crash with a different response such as an oppositional response.
The third type of decoding is the oppositional response. An oppositional reading, according to Hall, occurs when the viewer understands both the literal and implicative meanings of discourse but decodes the message in an entirely heterogeneous way. It is here, he argues, that the "politics of signification" meets the "struggle in the discourse," indicating the failure of practices of encoding to achieve a hegemonic reading of the text. (Pillai, 1992)
This response completely disagrees with the producer's message and depending on the receiver's social position, they would reject the producers' ideology. For example, the narrative in the trailer says that "Abdali's invasion means an assault to all India. This time he is invading with an army of 100,000. In his last invasion, the Yamuna River flowed red for seven days". (Gowarikar, 2019) The narration sparked anger among the viewers of the trailer. A large number of viewers of the trailer have expressed their anger and opposite notions over the message of the trailer. This is what called as "oppositional reading" by Stuart Halls.
Abdali fits the Alauddin Khilji mould of “otherness” – tall, imposing, and dismissive of Hindu martial prowess. A Pakistan-American columnist Dr Mohammad Taqi has questioned the casting of Sanjay Dutt in the role of Ahmad Shah Abdali. Taqi said that Abdali was 25 when he first invaded India, and 39 when the Third Battle of Panipat was fought. He died at the age of 50, therefore, making the casting of Dutt in the role inaccurate. He tweeted, "Ahmad Shah Abdali first invaded India when he was 25 and was 39 at the Battle of Panipat. He was a handsome man by all accounts and died at age 50. Sanjay Dutt is 60 and looks 160. If nothing else the casting director of Panipat movie should be fired posthaste." (Taqı, 2019)
Stuart Hall’s encoding and decoding model is of great importance to today’s media because we as viewers must be critical of analyzing media. What we watch, read, or listen must be analyzed carefully because the producers encoded message may seem harmless and rather in your favour of personal beliefs, but if you don’t effectively decode the message sent from the producer, you as a viewer may be at risk of being negatively influenced by the producers' ideology.
Panipat and the way to handle it
Panipat depicts Ahmad Shah Durrani's, known as the Ahmad Shah Abdali in the film, famous war with Maratha forces, the most powerful fighting forces in India at the time. Ahmad Shah Durrani, who is also known as the founder of modern Afghanistan, led the army to India many times after he came to power, the largest of which occurred in 1761. During the military campaign, Ahmad Shah Abdali defeated the army of 60,000 men of Rajputs with his 60,000 men force after a bloody battle. (Ajand, 2019) Ahmad Shah Durrani's victory in the Panipat guaranteed the continuation of Islamic rule in India for many years. But alongside that, it reinforced the British position in the country. A few years later, the British took over the continent in the absence of a belligerent and warlike force in India.
Indian cinema (Bollywood) wants to revive the war story again. The famous Indian actor Sanjay Dutt plays the role of Ahmad Shah Abdali and starring young Arjun Kapoor opposite him.
Only a trailer of the film is released so far. The trailer did not reveal how Ahmad Shah Abdali is portrayed in the film. However, the reactions are increasing through the social platform in Afghanistan. Afghans, especially Pashtun ethnics have a special sensitivity to the name of Ahmad Shah Abdali. They respect him as Ahmad Shah Baba (Ahmad Shah Father) for creation of the vast Durrani Emperor. That’s why any negative approach towards Ahmad Shah will face with sharp reactions in Afghanistan. On the other hand, India has a secular political system, which supports the freedom of speech and ideas.
India is called the biggest democratic system in the world. Affected by this political system, Indian cinema has established itself as an independent pillar influencing Indian public opinion. (Ajand, 2019) The Indian film industry is independent of Indian politics, but in line with the Indian system, has launched various historical, political and social films, some of which have made a lot of noise. Bollywood's critical look at the political system is one of the highlights of this industry in India. Similarly, Indian cinema has sometimes made films that have affected countries in the region. Most of the films narrating the successive wars between India and Pakistan have been made in a way that portrays Pakistan as an invading country and India as a defending country. In these films, the Hindu monarchy has always imposed a cruel defeat on the Pakistanis.
The same is in the case with Afghanistan, which has always been a friendly country in Indian politics. Sometimes the Indian films have had negative reactions in Afghanistan. The Kabul Express film, directed by in 2008 by Kabir Khan and starring John Abraham and Arshad Warsi, also sparked a sharp reaction from the Afghan government. The film was banned in Afghanistan. Because the film had insulted some ethnic groups in Afghanistan from the viewpoint of Afghans. However, the Kabul Express film could not have a negative impact on the political relations of the two countries despite the harsh reactions of the Afghans. In contrary to the hot discussions and reactions on social media, even now, the negative image of Ahmad Shah Durrani does not seem to have a negative effect on Afghanistan's foreign policy towards India.
So let us assume that Panipat has portrayed Afghanistan and its people negatively, insulted the honourable personality of Abdali and misrepresented history, how can this matter be handled?
If the people of Afghanistan wish to object to the film, they can, but how should they object? Some people may step forward and write a few critical lines against the film for their satisfaction, but a deeper look dictates that Afghans should make another film that presents Abdali’s actual image, the situation of Afghanistan at that time and the events of that era to the world. Afghans must show to the government of India and the Indian cinema that their narrative is wrong and that they have skilfully established that.
But how can Afghans do this? Do Afghans have the necessary artistic skill and resources? Afghanistan entered into its new political life 18 years ago and the international community made investments in different areas, but the government continues to neglect the cinema. No policies aimed at building the Afghan cinema have been formulated and no investor has invested in this area. Afghan Film [Afghanistan’s state-run film company] was stagnant and discriminated against. Over these years, Afghan artists have used their meagre resources to produce a few things, which can hardly be described as complete artistic work. Afghan Film may have produced some films in the absence of any resources. Except for one or two films, the remaining films it has produced were insignificant. Private cinema business has also not thrived.
Some changes have reportedly been seen in Afghan Film over the recent months in Ashraf Ghani’s government, but these changes are not tangible yet. Even the presidential candidates paid little attention to the Afghan cinema in their manifestos. None of them recognised it as a need in society. Given the above, a society such as the one in Afghanistan is unable to respond effectively to a foreign film that has touched on the history and values of Afghanistan. If Afghanistan is to respond to Panipat, it must do so in the form of a film backed by academic knowledge and cinematic resources, something that we lack.
M. Zaher Dowran
Communication Faculty of Ankara University
19913212
References
Ajand, F. (2019, November 06). Bollywood narrates Panipat war. Independent. Retrieved from https://www.independentpersian.com/node/27766/بالیوود-جنگ-«پانیپت»-را-روی-پرده-نقرهای-روایت-میکند
Chaudhury, D. (2019, November 13). Afghanistan raises alarm over the reel on the third battle of Panipat. The Economic Times.
DUTTA, A. N. (2019, November 07). Panipat film raises alarm in Afghanistan over Abdali portrayal, embassy writes to MEA. The Print. Retrieved from https://theprint.in/india/ashutosh-gowariker-panipat-film-raises-alarm-in-afghanistan-over-abdali-embassy-writes-to-india/316996/
Gowarikar, A. (Director). (2019). Panipat [Motion Picture]. Retrieved from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zpXnmy-6w1g
Pillai, P. (1992). "Rereading Stuart Hall's Encoding/Decoding Model". Communication Theory vol.2, no. 3, 221-233.